Deletion SortingProject (talk)Project page Lists (by ABC) Lists (by topic) Lists (computer-readable) AfD: Today, Yesterday Delsort scripts .mw-parser-output .navbar{display:inline;font-size:88%;font-weight:normal}.mw-parser-output .navbar-collapse{float:left;text-align:left}.mw-parser-output .navbar-boxtext{word-spacing:0}.mw-parser-output .navbar ul{display:inline-block;white-space:nowrap;line-height:inherit}.mw-parser-output .navbar-brackets::before{margin-right:-0.125em;content:"[ "}.mw-parser-output .navbar-brackets::after{margin-left:-0.125em;content:" ]"}.mw-parser-output .navbar li{word-spacing:-0.125em}.mw-parser-output .navbar a>span,.mw-parser-output .navbar a>abbr{text-decoration:inherit}.mw-parser-output .navbar-mini abbr{font-variant:small-caps;border-bottom:none;text-decoration:none;cursor:inherit}.mw-parser-output .navbar-ct-full{font-size:114%;margin:0 7em}.mw-parser-output .navbar-ct-mini{font-size:114%;margin:0 4em}v t e

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Food and drink. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add ((Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName)) to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding ((subst:delsort|Food and drink|~~~~)) to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Food and drink.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Food and drink/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Points of interest related to Food and drink on Wikipedia:
Category – WikiProject – Alerts – Deletions – Cleanup – Stubs – Assessment – To-do

Points of interest related to Food on Wikipedia:
Portal – Category – WikiProject – Stubs – To-do

Points of interest related to Beer on Wikipedia:
History – Portal – Category – WikiProject – Alerts – Cleanup – Assessment – To-do

Points of interest related to Soft drinks on Wikipedia:
Category – WikiProject – Assessment – To-do

Food and drink[edit]

Carrot cake cookie

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable cookie that does not pass WP:GNG, references consist of recipes and trivial mentions. WP:BEFORE check yielded no sources that show WP:SIGCOV. Should be merged into Carrot cake#UK and US if not deleted outright. BaduFerreira (talk) 21:35, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. BaduFerreira (talk) 21:35, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I have bookmarked scores of cookies I'd like to try making. This one isn't in it, but it appears to be a prime example of something that's just an inspired recipe with many variations, not a notable dish that's cohesively described outside of a cookbook writer's introduction. This could be a sentence in Carrot cake. Reywas92^Talk 02:42, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clementine cake

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Despite being a good article, not a single source has WP:SIGCOV of this specific cake. The majority of sources are recipes which is fine if they're accompanied by significant coverage and discussion of the dish, but there isn't any. The only shred of notability that I'm seeing comes from being a minor plot in a 2013 film and supposedly being an adaption of an ancient Jewish cake. The sources for this second claim are a personal blog (which isn't a reliable source) and the Encyclopedia of Jewish Food which makes no mention of an orange cake that this article claims Clementine cake was adapted from. We need sources that speak about this cake's notability (not just more recipes) and if that doesn't exist, I believe a selective merge to Fruitcake#United States is the best option. BaduFerreira (talk) 20:01, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The claims about the ancient cake appear to be from the New York Times? Valereee (talk) 21:28, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nice catch, I missed that. That source is a recipe on the New York Times cooking website and the entirety of discussion of this cake is as follows: "This dessert, loosely based on a Sephardic orange cake, uses whole clementines, peels and all, for a flavor rich in citrus. The cooking time may seem long, but much of it doesn’t require much attention from the baker. And the first step, reducing the fruit, may be done ahead of time." Nothing in terms of WP:SIGCOV. BaduFerreira (talk) 22:07, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You also missed that the recipe is connected to an article. The NYT does that with their food writing: they write an article, and then they put the recipe(s) from that article into separate article/s with the main article attached with a "Featured in" link. Valereee (talk) 22:12, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wow, I didn't realize that at all. Looking at the broader article shows where that earlier blurb came from: "The star of the feast came last: the Clementine Cake (pictured above). Baked by Dawn Datso, a family friend and professional pastry chef, it didn’t come from the book. But the cultural mash-up involved in its creation made it seem supremely appropriate. Years ago, while living in Malaysia, Ms. Datso was browsing in a library and came across a cookbook with some random recipe for Sephardic orange cake. A big fan of clementines, she eventually adapted the cake to feature them". The only WP:SIGCOV that can be pulled from this source is a person adapted a recipe for Sephardic orange cake by adding clementines and made her friend a cake. The baker (Dawn Datso) is described as a professional pastry chef, but I can't find any information about her. This doesn't show that Clementine cake has any notability. BaduFerreira (talk) 22:32, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You've been told twice before this on the talk that not every source used in an article has to represent significant coverage. Other RS can be used to support assertions. Valereee (talk) 22:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What sources currently used in this article show significant coverage? There isn't a single source used in this article that has significant coverage of Clementine cake as a notable cake. Three of the sources that you've added (The Guardian, The Sydney Morning Herald, The SF Chronicle) looked good at first, but they're recipes for an Orange & Almond Cake. Also none of them are over WP:100WORDS. BaduFerreira (talk) 22:55, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the Perelman source is quite lengthy. But even the sources you're objecting to for not having enough words -- that's an essay, btw, not policy -- are calling it famous and a classic. They're discussing its ancient roots and that it's a traditional Sephardic passover food. Significant coverage isn't just about wordcount. Sometimes it's about what they're saying and who's saying it. In this case, RS and experts from all over the world are saying it. Valereee (talk) 23:07, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I've added several more sources, although frankly I don't think this article needed it. The NYT has covered this cake multiple times. The Guardian has covered it. The San Francisco Chronicle. Claudia Roden has covered it. Nigella Lawson has covered it. Joyce Goldstein. It appears to be a cake that has ancient roots, which is always an indicator of notability. I didn't have to look very hard. Valereee (talk) 22:04, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This nomination gives me a weird feeling. First sources get removed and when they are restored and expanded on, a nomination follows. The Banner talk 23:03, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Beetroot cake

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable cake that does not pass WP:GNG, references consist of recipes and trivial mentions. WP:BEFORE check yielded no sources that show WP:SIGCOV. BaduFerreira (talk) 04:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. BaduFerreira (talk) 04:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect and Merge to Beetroot, where several recipes are mentioned; agree with nom it's not really notable in itself. This one can be added at Beetroot as it's reliably cited. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:40, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, as there seems to be enough sources available, particularly if the scope is broadened slightly to include the use of beetroot as a supplement to other baked products (for reasons of extending the shelf-life, for example). Klbrain (talk) 13:12, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to the relevant page. The article doesn't sit well alone, so redirecting is probably best. Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 16:16, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tara Patkar (social activist)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Repost of content previously deleted and salted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tara Patkar * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:08, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Food and drink, Journalism, Politics, and Uttar Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:29, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Guarana (energy drink)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NPRODUCT. Admittedly, the name doesn't make searching the easiest, but I haven't found any significant coverage. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 20:47, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Products, and Serbia. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 20:47, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:42, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Priyagold

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not able to find reliable sources with significant coverage of Priyagold apart from the routine coverage, numerical facts and press releases. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 09:42, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and India. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 09:42, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Companies. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:43, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per sources and company revenue, this article is enough notable as per wikipedia guidelines^[1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ss6644 (talk • contribs) 18:54, 6 April 2024 (UTC) — Ss6644 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

References

^ https://www.dnaindia.com/business/report-meet-ballabh-prasad-agarwal-who-quit-family-business-built-rs-3000-crore-firm-priyagold-which-is-challenging-3080038

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:10, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Takamaka Rum

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The focal point of significance lies in "La Plaine St. André," a 400-year-old historical plantation where this rum company operates a distillery and a store. It seems rather awkward that instead of the plantation having its own dedicated page, the brand is represented solely. Moreover, the page lacks reliable sources and is being developed by a banned editor exclusively focused on promoting this rum brand. Charlie (talk) 14:02, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Charlie (talk) 14:02, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I have created a Wikipedia page for La Plaine St. André. I am open for merge and include any non-promotional content from Takamaka Rum on the La Plaine page. Charlie (talk) 15:30, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sources. Many are interviews with the founders/"rum maker", blog-based reviews or press releases, so don't count towards notability. These may be Ok though: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. Fair coverage, but would like to hear other views before making a decision. Rupples (talk) 17:15, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Could merge a portion to the plantation article as discussed. This appears largely PROMO. Mentioned in plenty of travel guides in Gbooks, but the are all only a few lines only. Oaktree b (talk) 23:42, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:36, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hot milk cake

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable cake that does not pass WP:GNG, references consist of recipes and trivial mentions. WP:BEFORE check yielded no sources that show WP:SIGCOV. BaduFerreira (talk) 13:35, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. BaduFerreira (talk) 13:35, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:16, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Although it may not be obvious from the article (which I've not looked at), this is a baking technique for sponge cakes, rather than an individual recipe. One of the earliest known recipes was published in 1911.[7] It became popular during the Great Depression and wartime rationing.[8] We have some information about how the cake works (the hot milk starts cooking the egg whites before the cake goes in the oven).[9] WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:10, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Classic baking technique. Already kept in an earlier AfD. The Banner talk 15:47, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

White cake

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable cake that does not pass WP:GNG, references consist of recipes and trivial mentions. WP:BEFORE check yielded no sources that show WP:SIGCOV. This should be turned into a redirect to cake, which should include a sentence stating "White cake, named after the color of the crumb, is made without using egg yolks". BaduFerreira (talk) 13:06, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. BaduFerreira (talk) 13:06, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:15, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There's more cultural content for this subject than just a description of the contents. White cake, sometimes also called silver cake, isn't just a yolkless yellow cake. From the historical viewpoint, it required not just a willingness to omit the egg yolks (which could be used in other dishes), but also having access to plenty of butter, refined wheat flour, and refined white sugar, which meant that it started off as a luxury and a status symbol (ISBN 9780199313396, "Wedding cake" by Carol Wilson). Just having pure white icing was an expensive status symbol in the 17th century; having a white cake under that icing was basically never done. Properly speaking, the modern white cakes – a butter-based layer cake – didn't exist until the latter part of the 19th century (ISBN 9780199734962, "Wedding" by Wendy A. Woloson), because before the baking powder revolution (latter third of the 19th century), producing a white cake would have been a technical triumph. The almond-based lady cake (from the 1830s) also omitted egg yolks and was the closest you could realistically get before then (ISBN 9780199313396, "Celebration cakes" by Stephen Schmidt), unless you wanted to risk a tough "white sponge" (ISBN 9780199734962, "Cake" by Sally Parham; that white sponge eventually developed into the modern angel food cake). On the cultural side, they became associated with weddings and with christenings. By the early-to-mid 20th century, the modern white butter cake had supplanted the traditional fruitcake at weddings (Queen Victoria had a fruit cake at her wedding; only the icing was white), and by the end of the century, for non-wedding celebrations, chocolate was more popular (ibid). Box mixes for white cakes were introduced around 1930 (ISBN 9780199313396, "Cake mix" by Laura Shapiro). Additionally, as white cake is used as a building block, there could be a fairly long section on variations or cake styles that are white layers with something added, e.g., Lady Baltimore cake. So there you are: with a couple of articles from two high-quality books from Oxford University Press, and you can re-write the whole article now. There are also some academic articles about white cakes, but their usefulness for an encyclopedia article is mostly not obvious to me (e.g., "White layer cake batter emulsion characteristics" or "Gelatinization of starch and white layer cake quality", though "Better White Layer Cakes Ahead?" may have nutritional information). If you were to go looking for particular content that is unique to white cake, I'd suggest looking into the difficulty of making a really good white cake with gluten-free flour substitutes. Chocolate, fruit, or spice are trivial to convert, and yellow's not too difficult, but a white cake is hard to get right, without any unwanted flavors shining through. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:12, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Another classic baking technique. Maybe this source will help: What's The Difference Between Yellow, White, and Vanilla Cake?. The Banner talk 15:56, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Classic cake, possibly the most widely-known of modern cakes. Valereee (talk) 18:51, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spice cake

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. BaduFerreira (talk) 13:02, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question. Is this similar enough to Spiced breads for a move? Bearian (talk) 14:34, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think a spiced bread or spice bread article exists (the latter is a redirect to the spice cake article). Are you thinking of sliced bread? BaduFerreira (talk) 16:22, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Spice cake is a cake whose most prominent characteristic is the inclusion of strongly flavored spices. It is a category of related cakes, like fruitcake or chocolate cake. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:08, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This is my absolutely favorite type of cake but I don't think this makes me involved here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:15, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Relying primarily on "Cake" by Sally Parham in The Oxford Encyclopedia of Food and Drink in America, I there are two possible scopes for this article. The one that interests me most is the butter cake version after the baking powder revolution. However, there's also the much older yeast-based spice cakes from the 17th and 18th centuries (Martha Washington's great cake is at the tail end of that), which may be what Bearian is thinking of. If you imagine one of these spice-and-currants cakes, originally rather more like Raisin bread than like a layer cake, a modern spice cake translates that flavor profile out of the original yeast bread or the heavy fruit cake and into a modern butter cake. Parham writes 'The old fruited, spiced cakes baked for tea, too, were dragooned into the new butter cake family... Already darkened, if only slightly, by fruit and spice, these cakes gathered into a new clutch of butter cakes that were intentionally darkened to a fare-thee-well—by spices and brown sugar or molasses, to make “spice cakes”.' She also says spice cake was the second most popular category of butter cake during the 20th century (after chocolate, before vanilla), and that they adapted to the mid-century vegetable oil trend nicely. Examples of modern spice cakes include Applesauce cake, Carrot cake, and Gingerbread, as well as some less common ones, such as Gâteau de Sirop or Parkin (cake). WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:11, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I've found coverage in Food & Wine, Southern Living, and The Daily Meal with just a very brief search. I don't see any signs this dish isn't notable. Valereee (talk) 18:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fudge cake

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable chocolate cake variant that does not pass WP:GNG, references consist of recipes and trivial mentions. WP:BEFORE check yielded no sources that show WP:SIGCOV. BaduFerreira (talk) 17:20, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. BaduFerreira (talk) 17:20, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, very distinctive kind of cake. Hyperbolick (talk) 20:10, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Eg, https://magazine.wellesley.edu/winter-2023/oh-fudge Hyperbolick (talk) 20:12, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - This source is for Wellesley Fudge Cake, whereas the article that I nominated is about Fudge cake. They appear to be two different desserts. Regardless, we need more than one reliable source to show a topic's notability BaduFerreira (talk) 21:57, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    - Rejecting outright the proposition that “Wellesley Fudge Cake" is anything but some kind of fudge cake. Considering chocolate cake lists a dozen different kinds. There can be different kinds of a thing. Suppose it could be emerged into chocolate cake. Hyperbolick (talk) 06:04, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep: I have found some additional sources: [10], [11], [12]. I do realize that these are just blogs, but I think it's generally hard to find more reliable online sources when it comes to food recipes. Possibly someone with access to cookbooks could add such a reference, as cookbooks seem to be used a lot on food-related articles. Bendegúz Ács (talk) 10:54, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Fudge cake article is about a dessert called fudge cake, not its recipe. Recipes cannot be used as reliable sources because every food has a recipe for how to make it. We need several sources that speak about the significance of Fudge cake to prove its notability and I have not found any sources that suggest that Fudge cake is a notable cake. None of the sources that you've provided are reliable. BaduFerreira (talk) 12:55, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with chocolate cake. While it does seem to be a distinct kind of chocolate cake, it doesn't seem to have any particular ingredient or cooking/construction process that distinguishes it from a generic chocolate cake (like a red velvet cake) or cultural prominence (like a Black Forest cake). But given that it is a specific variety of chocolate cake, with a defined recipe and expected outcome, it should be explained to at least some degree. The Cheesecake article is, I think, a fairly good example of how variations of a food should be treated (assuming that the variations can be sourced and don't meet WP:GNG). Ships&Space (talk) 20:59, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with chocolate cake, which this is a variety of. Reywas92^Talk 04:23, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:16, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. I assume that this is only the ordinary chocolate fudge cake and not, e.g., Tunnel of Fudge cake (which is separately notable, and also impossible to make any longer due to the key ingredient being discontinued). The ordinary chocolate cakes (i.e., American-style layer cakes – not tortes, not flourless, etc.) can be distinguished into at least the categories of devil's food cake, fudge cake, and German chocolate cake (per "Chocolate" by Maricel Presilla in The Oxford Encyclopedia of Food and Drink in America) and perhaps, although this assertion confuses me, buttermilk ("Cake" by Sally Parham in same; she brushes past but doesn't name Mahogany cake, which is the transitional point in the 1880s, just before brownies [1890s] and the true chocolate cake [maybe around 1900] [though some consider mahogany cake to be the first chocolate cake [13], and there is at least one recipe from early in the 19th century for a chocolate cake – though not for a modern one, as baking powder didn't exist then]). Devil's food cake is made with Dutch-process cocoa powder and baking soda (the combination of these two produces a reddish tinge), and German's uses pre-sweetened chocolate bars, so those two are easy to separate, but fudge cake and chocolate cake both have similar ingredients. This source says the difference between fudge cake and chocolate cake is in the texture (fudge cake is moister and denser), and then describes differences in mixing technique (chocolate uses the creaming method and fudge uses the stirring method). From the description, Texas sheet cake (which currently redirects to a mostly irrelevant page, and is probably notable) is a fudge cake. I think that the labels are not always used with great precision. For example, blackout cake was originally called a chocolate fudge cake, but this source says the cake layers are devil's food cake, and our article calls it a (plain) chocolate cake. The Wellesley Fudge Cake from the early 20th century is one of the early versions of fudge cake. Wherever the information ends up, the first box mix specifically marketed as chocolate fudge cake might have been in 1948 by Pillsbury ("Cake mix" by Laura Shapiro in The Oxford Companion to Sugar and Sweets; note that Duff's put out a mix for Devil's food cake in the 1930s). Because the line is so porous, it might be better to merge fudge cake into chocolate cake, than to attempt drawing a firm line between them. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:29, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Very well known type of cake, often served in restaurants. The Banner talk 15:38, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

LesserEvil

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I nominated this page for deletion for not establishing its notability in 2022 and I've now realised it has been recreated. Admittedly, the article now has more sources than it did then but as can be seen from the table below, there are still no sources that count towards GNG or ORGCRIT. They are almost all either small local newspapers or specialist trade publications. In any case, the sources either largely depend on quotes or read like press releases. It should be deleted.

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
Pitchbook (https://pitchbook.com/profiles/company/128856-34#overview)	? Unknown where Pitchbook gets their info from but doubtful it is independent.		WP:ORGTRIV Merely an entry into a database	✘ No
International Bakery Article (https://in-bakery.com/lesserevil-collaborates-with-rind-snacks/)	The article consists largely (though) not entirely of quotes	IB seems to be an indutry blog largely publishing press releases, not a secondary source as such	barely	✘ No
The Journal News, White Plains NY article (https://www.newspapers.com/image/166431624/?clipping_id=131265720&fcfToken=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJmcmVlLXZpZXctaWQiOjE2NjQzMTYyNCwiaWF0IjoxNzEyMDc2MjcyLCJleHAiOjE3MTIxNjI2NzJ9.p5UIjOhpxTsTgxJjWAhxUUrtn66o7Rfk9j7GFrpgnRA)	Consists largely of quotes and reads like a press release	? I assume the Newspaper in question is reliable but I don't know	WP:AUD the newspaper's audience is too local	✘ No
Stamford Advocate article (https://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/article/judges-like-what-they-savor-in-lesserevil-3442484.php)	Consists largely of quotes and reads like a press release	? I assume the Newspaper in question is reliable but I don't know	In any event, WP:AUD the newspaper's audience is too local	✘ No
Own company website history	Obviously the co's own coverage is not independent			✘ No
Hatford Business Journal article (https://www.hartfordbusiness.com/article/nearing-100m-in-annual-revenues-cts-lesserevil-expands-organic-snack-foods-line-readies-new)	Large quotes and the article simply rattles off facts that likely came from the company, not much evidence of their own journalism but not as quote-heavy as some of the others	? The HBJ seems to largely publish press releases, but I am unsure about its journalistic practices	Very doubtful about its circulation per WP:AUD but the coverage is more in-depth than the other articles	✘ No
Danbury daily voice article (https://dailyvoice.com/connecticut/danbury/business/lesserevil-snacks-opens-a-new-factory-in-danbury/580408/)	Largely quotes	? I assume the Newspaper in question is reliable but I don't know	WP:AUD local newspaper	✘ No
Danbury's Financial Report	Presumable	I presume it is	The City of Danbury's financial report is not significant is a primary source	✘ No
Nosh article (https://www.nosh.com/news/2020/lesserevil-moves-into-new-categories-expands-distribution/)	Many quotes; reads like a press release	Reads like a press release	It's a specialist trade blog/magazine	✘ No
Foodbusiness news article (https://www.foodbusinessnews.net/articles/21129-lesserevil-enters-bar-category-with-acquisition-of-redd-bar)	Mostly quotes	Reads like a press release	It's a specialist trade blog/magazine	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using ((source assess table)).

Jtrrs0 (talk) 17:44, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Companies. Jtrrs0 (talk) 17:44, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:56, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. We need at least one independent non-local source per WP:NCORP, so we look at International Bakery (a reprint of this press release [14]), Foodbusiness (a reprint of this press release [15]), and Nosh (I feel slightly better about this as a source than nom, previous RSN discussion [16], but in any case, the specific article is a CEO interview). ~ A412 ^talk! 23:42, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just to note that we need at least two sources per WP:NCORP, not one. Jtrrs0 (talk) 11:18, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think we agree, and I'm aware of the general provisions of WP:NCORP, I was quoting the audience requirement, which says At least one regional, statewide, provincial, national, or international source is necessary. ~ A412 ^talk! 18:59, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Right, sorry! Jtrrs0 (talk) 08:55, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Two new sources have been added - a Forbes article from 2019, as well as a more recent Bloomberg Law article. The company is well-known and worthy of an article. It can be improved but not worthy of deletion. CityLimitsJunction (talk) 01:53, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Articles by Forbes contributors are generally not considered reliable. ~ A412 ^talk! 02:03, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd agree with @A412 that Forbes is not reliable. I have tried having a look at the Bloomberg Law article. It is paywalled so I can't read all of it. Bloomberg Law is probably reliable, like most articles written by Bloomberg staff tend to be. I am not sure it amounts to significant coverage for the company, though. It's an article, as far as I can see, about a first-instance lawsuit against the company. I am not sure that it should count. Even if it's sufficiently in-depth, I am not sure it sufficiently demonstrates the company is notable enough. Jtrrs0 (talk) 11:17, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Two additional independent & non-local sources have been added - neither echo any press release material. Thus the article shall remain active. CityLimitsJunction (talk) 14:54, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I only see one extra source, the Just Food piece. If you mean the sources in the 'Ingredients' section I removed, they should also not count because some nutriologist noting that a product has a short ingredient list does not even come close to establishing the company's notability.

Apart from that, I've had a look at the Just Food article. It is almost entirely reliant on quotes from the Company/its officers/business partners. It is not independent.

Furthermore, even if we do find two sources, please note that only creates a presumption of notability (per WP:ORGCRIT. Jtrrs0 (talk) 15:52, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I've added multiple additional RS with SIGCOV, removed a few of the worst press-release ones and the content sourced only to them. I think this subject makes it over the hump. Valereee (talk) 16:46, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can see, none of the sources added amount to to RS SIGCOV. They are:
'Top 10 list' style coverage that happens to cover one of their products ( [17] and [18]) and which only amount to trivial coverage;

A Forbes contributor piece ([19]) which is not RS;

Reviews of a product of the company ([20] and [21]) which must be treated very carefully. Setting aside whether they are reliable and independent sources, neither amounts to significant coverage of the company. They are just covering some of their products. Coverage of the company itself is trivial. Companies do not inherit notability from their products.
Jtrrs0 (talk) 17:35, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't add that Forbes piece. I added Men's Health, Business Insider, E! Online, Bon Appetit, Baking Business, Prevention, WFSB, Self, and Eat This, Not That, IIRC. Valereee (talk) 18:02, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies for the confusion on my part. I'll deal with them one by one:
Men's health is link 8. I don't think a review of a single product establishes notability either of the company or of their product line such that WP:NPRODUCT applies.

Business Insider [22] is paywalled but seems to be just another review of a single product.

E! (link 5 above) is indeed trivial coverage of a single product in a Top 15 list.

Bon appetit (link 7) is a slightly less trivial review of a single product. It's a few paragraphs of prose rather than a terse couple of sentences in a top 10 list. This surely still can't amount to SIGCOV of the company though. Is the company notable because a reviewer liked their pink salt popcorn?

Baking Business [23]: reads suspiciously like a press release. I've found two posts with almost identical wording ([24] and [25]). It's almost certainly a press release.

Prevention [26] is a one-line mention of the company in a top 30 list.

WFSB [27] has several problems. The article is largely composed of quotes. It's not independent. Likewise the 1min57s reportage. WFSB is also a newstation local to Hartford.

In my view none of these establish a presumption of notability for the company or their products. They are all reviews of a single product, entries in a Top X list, press releases or otherwise not sources we count for notability. Jtrrs0 (talk) 08:51, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Companies do not inherit notability from their products.

While this is true, the article is effectively about the company's line of snack products, and by WP:NPRODUCT, In cases where a company is mainly known for a single series of products or services, it is usually better to cover the company and its products/services in the same article. This article can be the name of the company or the name of its product, depending on which is the primary topic.

I would be inclined, in this case, to count substantial reviews of their product line, though I have yet to look at the sources added by Valereee. ~ A412 ^talk! 18:58, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I take your point. If there were substantial reviews of the company's product range I might be inclined to agree (subject obvs to the reviews being substantial reliable and independent). But as you can see from my reply to Valereee, none of the new sources amount to that. They are either reviews of individual products, or top 10 list entries or a press release. Jtrrs0 (talk) 08:55, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More analysis of the sources that have been added would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 01:07, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep With the addition of credible sources by Valereee, and 'Recognition' section now firmly demonstrates the subject's notability on its own.Gedaali (talk) 09:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spinach salad

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable salad that does not pass WP:GNG, references consist of recipes and trivial mentions. WP:BEFORE check yielded no sources that show WP:SIGCOV. BaduFerreira (talk) 23:21, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. BaduFerreira (talk) 23:21, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete You can make a traditional salad with lettuce, spinach, kale, arugula, or a mix of greens and then top with literally anything. I'm confused why we'd need a stand-alone article for something so generic and non-specific. Or redirect to List of salads, salad, or Spinach#Consumption_and_nutrition. Reywas92^Talk 13:49, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:BEFORE, because in many restaurants' menus and cookbooks, "spinach salad" is distinct from other salads. It is always always served room temperature, like arugala, but unlike lettuce or cabbage salads, which are served cold, and almost never with creamy, but rather sour dressings, and with bacon. Therefore, unlike those other salads, it is often not kosher. For Generation X and older folks, this is a very unique dish. Bearian (talk) 16:07, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you add a reliable source that contains this information to the article then? I have found no evidence that Spinach salad is a notable dish that merits its own article. BaduFerreira (talk) 16:50, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:48, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:22, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Oh, my goodness. Spinach salad and its various recipes is possibly one of the favorite salads for many. For instance, please see Food Network 14 Spinach Salad Recipes. Trader Joe's food chain is somewhat infamous for it's Super Spinach Salad. Do an internet search on spinach salad, and the results are pages and pages of the salad variations. And this includes Reddit. — Maile (talk) 00:48, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just copied much of what I wrote above, including the sourcing, to the article. Hope this helps. — Maile (talk) 01:01, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions, but unfortunately the "sources" that you've added are not reliable in the slightest. None of this demonstrates that spinach salad is notable enough for a wikipedia article. BaduFerreira (talk) 01:42, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see recipes for the thing, but I don't see evidence in secondary sources that the thing is actually a thing. Redirect to some salad or other. Drmies (talk) 01:44, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Valereee is there possibly anything you can do to help save this article on Spinach salad? — Maile (talk) 02:10, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Maile66, I hate to break it to you, but spinach salad is just highly overrated. It's just salad. And I had one with my dinner. Drmies (talk) 02:16, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hm. The number of recipes is huge, which in general is an indication a dish is likely notable and we'll be able to find sources discussing it. I'm not immediately finding them, but that doesn't mean someone hasn't. I may have to do some offline research. I'm traveling but I'll give myself a w-ping to circle back when I'm back home. Valereee (talk) 02:31, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Valereee just make sure that they wash the spinach for your salad carefully while you are on the road; I hear E. coli is real bad where you are. Drmies (talk) 02:37, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's those damn chickens. Valereee (talk) 02:40, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drmies, my personal friend Popeye, some say "boyfriend", wants you to know that spinach made him everything he is today, — Maile (talk) 02:57, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He ate it from a CAN, Maile. Come on now. And he ate while he smoked--no, don't hold Popeye up as some authority. Drmies (talk) 02:59, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you know how the military handled those K-rationed foods. That eating and smoking thing wasn't that unusual for his generation, especially with the military meals coming in a can. Before reality hit mankind, it was pretty normal for peole to smoke at the dinner table, with no regard about how it affected anyone else. — Maile (talk) 03:23, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guys, I hate to be a stickler for the rules but please stay on topic as to WP:TALK#TOPIC. This isn't productive for assessing a topic's notability. BaduFerreira (talk) 03:59, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BaduFerreira, you have a point but be careful not to BLUDGEON here. You made your nomination statement, you don't need to counter-argue every editor's opinion you disagree with. Let people have their say even if they have the opposite opinion to your own. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:58, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And it's fine if people have fun while they're discussing, which is what's going on between Drmies, Maile, and me. At its most basic, we're demonstrating to one another that we recognize each other as well-intentioned. Valereee (talk) 00:49, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per Reywas. List of salads should be a fine redirect. One can find recipes with salad made from any palatable leaf. However, I don't see significant coverage nor any suggestion of cultural or other importance. As a side note, recent additions to the article are poor attempts to justify its existence. I quote from its current state: "An internet search on spinach salad, results in pages and pages of the salad variations. Many recipe variations can be found at Reddit". This is unfortunate.Heavy Grasshopper (talk) 10:10, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - re the link to List of salads, the table has links to Category:Salads, which takes us right back to informative articles on individual salads. — Maile (talk) 13:12, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm landing on Keep. I've found quite a lot of coverage and added it today. Valereee (talk) 00:46, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Like : You did good. Thanks for the work. — Maile (talk) 00:57, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ping. Always interested in articles about foods/dishes. Valereee (talk) 01:01, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Purge server cache

Food and drink[edit]

Carrot cake cookie

Clementine cake

Beetroot cake

Tara Patkar (social activist)

Guarana (energy drink)

Priyagold

Takamaka Rum

Hot milk cake

White cake

Spice cake

Fudge cake

LesserEvil

Spinach salad

Proposed deletions

Templates for Discussion