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.
rejected at afc stating This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia and then created in mainspace. Its references do not show that the company qualifies for a Wikipedia article per WP:NCORP Ninjastic Ninja (talk) 13:34, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete as WP:G11 and WP:A7. Draft was created by an undisclosed paid editor who previously submitted Draft:Lacrima Dairy, which was also G11 speedied. --Drm310🍁 (talk) 16:38, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I tagged it as potentially not WP:GNG-worthy during NPP simply 'cos I thought I'd sent too much to AfD for the day. So here's a delete vote. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 11:07, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I concur with assessment that this is extremely likely to be native UPE; it is displayed as a client of a firm that is definitely conducting UPE on Wikipedia according to recent WP:COIN case. ☆ Bri (talk) 20:24, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the text ties back to the company’s website, but much of its appears to be original research as it is uncited. Subject appears to be a run of the mill company, a before search only brings up peripheral mentions.
Delete. My deletion proposal had nothing to do with the article needing "a lot of work"; it was to do with the fact that neither cited in the article nor anywhere else that I can find is there any evidence of satisfying Wikipedia's notability guidelines. The article cites no independent sources at all. JBW (talk) 07:44, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It has been a major chain for decades, and it's completely unsurprising that when I did a newspaper archive search (through NewsBank, which is the one our National Library provides access to) to verify this, taking the time to filter out irrelevant hits (of which there are many, due to other uses of the first name and references to the unrelated US chain), I found abundant, detailed business-section coverage over a very long period of time. The article literally just needs a lot of work. That you haven't heard of a household-name national chain that does not exist in your country ("run-of-the-mill company" my foot) and an article needs work is not a reason for deletion. (NB: It's almost always known as "Wendy's", not "Wendy's Milk Bar", which seems to be a short-lived rebrand attempt some years ago, which would be why your supposed WP:BEFORE search didn't turn up much.) The Drover's Wife (talk) 10:25, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Unsourced and I can't find any. If it's notable, I'd expect some sources to turn up. Oaktree b (talk) 12:16, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Gbooks and Google, Gnews has two pages, unsure of which are reliable sources. They should be added to the article if they are notable. Oaktree b (talk) 17:01, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Under which title? (If you're not looking for the company's usual name, Wendy's (without the Milk Bar), no surprise that you didn't find any hits for them. The Drover's Wife (talk) 00:50, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, That you haven't heard of a household-name national chain that does not exist in your country. I was well aware of its existence, but that is not the issue. As it stands, the article remains uncited in clear contravention of WP:V. If cites do exist that would overcome the notability issue, then the best way of maximising the chances of the article surviving would be to add them rather than taking pot shots at other editors. Glenefill (talk) 00:39, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Notability depends on the sources that exist, not the current state of the article, and it's very easy to find abundant sources in any database of historical Australian newspapers (as long as one takes the time to filter out the irrelevant hits). The Drover's Wife (talk) 00:50, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 08:24, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per Jumpytoo's inclusion of sources.ItsMackie (talk) 15:07, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Agree, with the new sources found, it's not much, but it helps establish notability, that's all we need. Oaktree b (talk) 19:30, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Good sourcing by Jumpytoo, references meet NCORP's criteria for establishing notability. HighKing++ 20:21, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
CommentUser:Jumpytoo Great job finding sources. Hint: Once you find sources, do the next thing and add them as sources within the article. It is true that their existence, even if not used in the article, bears upon the AFD. But we should be improving articles, not just niffnawng about AFDs. The job was only half done. It's your choice and privilege, but it is my respectful recommendation. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:29, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I have been there. I have drunk the beer. But it does, indeed, fail WP:NCORP which really, really sucks because it's a fabulous place (and fabulous beer!). I looked for something, anything out there, but sadly not a trace of WP:SIGCOV. It's a rotten world, folks. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 08:25, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Highly experienced creator...JIP, would you maybe want to userfy this and work on it in user space? Maybe if you can find Finnish sources? valereee (talk) 14:44, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I myself searched for the Finnish name of the restaurant and was unable to find sufficient sourcing. It’s generally not a good idea to draftify articles that whose subjects lack notability, as there is nothing that working on a draft can do to make a non-notable article subject notable. Therefore, I oppose draftification of this article as an alternative to deletion unless this company’s notability can be credibly demonstrated. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 17:55, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but you can keep a draft in userspace and watch for more sources to show up. I have drafts in my userspace that just don't quite make it over the hump but that I believe might at some point. But I don't have a strong opinion on this -- as an admin, JIP can easily go view the draft and copy it to their userspace themselves. What I'd really like to see is them translating into their userspace and then not moving to main until they've proven notability, as it seems fi.wiki may have profoundly different requirements. valereee (talk) 20:36, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
[I]t seems fi.wiki may have profoundly different requirements.
Reading their guidelines, they seem to be pretty much the same as here. I think a smaller community just means less oversight in practice. ;; Maddy ♥︎(they/she)♥︎ :: talk 18:18, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I was unable to find an equivalent to WP:NCORP on fi.wiki, so notability for companies appears to go by their WP:GNG-equivalent. WP:ORGIND and WP:CORPDEPTH are more strict than GNG, so it's quite possible that the article meets inclusion standards on fi.wiki but not en.wiki. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 04:18, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD originally tagged by Johnpacklambert. Reasoning was: The one reference here is not enough to show notability and chefs are not default notable just because someone somewhere once published a short blurd on them. Reasoning still holds. Jalen Folf(talk) 17:27, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the one source is a passing mention that says this chef studied at a school in Paris, the school in question is also the publisher of the one reference. This is not an indepdent source, so does not add towards passing GNG. Beyond this GNG can never be passed by one source.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:28, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I should note that I'm surprised I could find so many references on him given that he died before the internet was really a thing (about 6 years before it became a real thing with content outside of academia, science, and military stuff). And Japan lags about a decade behind North America in what you can find online, too, so many of the contemporary sources are only available in print. Given what I could find, I'm 100% sure there are many print sources I can't access online. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 23:58, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The article is in much better condition, and the sources seem to indicate notability. Why? I Ask (talk) 18:45, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - and suggest withdrawing the nomination, the article as it stands now gives a clear indication of notability. nableezy - 00:39, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is a company/organization therefore NCORP guidelines apply. I am unable to locate references that meet both ORGIND and CORPDEPTH. Most of the references regurgitate corporate announcements and PR. The rest focus on the class action lawsuit but don't meet CORPDEPTH. HighKing++ 13:03, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Frank Haasnoot won the World Chocolate Master in 2011, which is one of the biggest competition in the world of pastry. Currently, chef is actively continuing his career as a pastry chef and instructor, educating students all around the world. He has also worked as an Executive Pastry Chef in top pastry companies such as Dobla, Peninsula Hotel Hong Kong. The Dutch chef and chocolatier master has over 350k followers on Instagram, he is one of the chefs who have elevated their craft to the new art form. He built the foundation of techniques and methods for new generation of chefs. KseniaChabria (talk) 16:40, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 19:23, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment sources are mainly in Dutch, so I don't know how reliable they are. A brief summary of his residence in a Paris establishment via the AFP , is about all I find for him. Nothing in GBooks, Gscholar, the NYT either. Oaktree b (talk) 20:08, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please let me know at your convenience. Really appreciate your help! Semonative (talk) 03:34, 2 June 2022 (UTC)Semonative[reply]
Hi valereee - any update on this? Thanks! Semonative (talk) 18:36, 2 June 2022 (UTC)Semonative[reply]
Hi, @Semonative. What we like to see for an organization is multiple articles in reliable sources that cover the business itself at length and aren't limited to local or industry media. The NBC show is possibly one. IMO it's more about the idea and the pandemic than the business itself, but it could arguably be one of the three. Which of the sources you've provided would go to that? Also, please disclose your WP:COI, as has been requested on your User talk:Semonative. That is a non-negotiable. valereee (talk) 18:48, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 19:24, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete That NBC item is about the only source I can find. Pages of press releases, not enough about the company in non-PR media land. The undisclosed COI is also worrysome. Oaktree b (talk) 20:04, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It took a somewhat deeper analysis than usual, however I'm convinced that the topic does not cross the threshold of notability. The term's use is limited to a "declaration" produced at some 2009 workshop in France and a report produced in 2013 by one of its participants (and author of the term). Barring a single article in the Guardian, neither the report nor the idea has been picked up by the mainstream science or media.
Monthly Google Trends reports shows single-digit searches for Demitarian, typically 0–7 searches per month worldwide.
The ar-wiki version is a word-for-word translation of the first two paragraphs of the en-wiki article. The es-wiki article is practically unsourced (none of the five references mentions demitarianism).
All in all, the article appears created as some sort of promotion/advocacy while the topic appears to fall short of WP:GNG. — kashmīrīTALK 20:46, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Sorry but I'm not seeing any "significant coverage". The Guardian piece is already linked in the article as is pretty much the only mention in the popular media that I was able to find in English. The second source, i.e., the chapter of a niche book, indeed discusses the idea of the demitarian diet, however it's not an independent source, because the chapter's lead author Gilles Billen sits on the management committee of NinE, the organisation behind the Barsac Declaration, and also is a signatory of the Declaration. So, it still looks like a far cry from WP:GNG. — kashmīrīTALK 22:28, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Good point. I found other examples of significant coverage in academic literature, but as you point out, at least one of the authors in each case (Erisman, Sutton, & Billen) are involved with NinE, and so not independent. The Guardian article appears to be the only independent reliable coverage. SailingInABathTub (talk) 23:26, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, StarMississippi 02:24, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:07, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - There's an overlap with other Wikipedia articles that address meat reduction. In particular, there's a merge being proposed between Flexitarianism and Semi-vegetarianism. Assuming that we decide that an article specifically on Demitarianism is not justified, it seems to me that a merge/redirect to one of these articles would be in order. — Charles Stewart(talk) 12:22, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The organization lacks significant coverage in reliable sources and only mentioned in passing in the independent references provided on page. Meatsgains(talk) 22:47, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think the article got better by improving it Adam080 (talk) 12:13, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
How should I improve this article to avoid being deleted? Is it that it does not have enough reliable sources? What do you mean there is no in-depth coverage? Adam080 (talk) 11:27, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No deleting this!!! It is a good article!!!. The organization and its founder Omri Paz have lots and lots of coverage in Hebrew! Their materials and lectures have been viewed millions of times!!! Like look at these sources: חוקרת (Researcher) (talk) 08:18, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. But maybe we should try to find articles that the main subject is not vegan friendly, that way it is independant Adam080 (talk) 17:56, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's really the same here, Omri Paz is Vega Friendly and Vegan Friendly is Omri Paz. And these sources cover Vegan Friendly activity. חוקרת (Researcher) (talk) 06:21, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:04, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:52, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Seeing decent covergae, and some already added, not really seeing grounds for deletion. Artw (talk) 14:59, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What are the reliable sources with significant coverage independent of the subject, as required by WP:NCORP? MarioGom (talk) 20:42, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Last chance to reach consensus! Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, gidonb (talk) 03:35, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I've gone through and heavily edited, and I think this is a notable organization. There's sigcov in multiple RS, including outside of Israel. valereee (talk) 17:19, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]