Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Food and drink

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by AnomieBOT (talk | contribs) at 22:29, 21 July 2025 (Archiving closed XfDs (errors?): Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Catch (brand)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Deletion Sorting
Project

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:
  1. 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.
  2. 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.
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 other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Food and drink. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
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:
Purge page cache watch

Food and drink

Prestige Hong Kong

Prestige Hong Kong (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article that has been effectively unsourced from its creation in 2007. Not finding anything on a Google search (string: ["prestige hong kong" -prestigeonline.com]) or anything passable as a source in history (SOPA is 404-compliant, https://web.archive.org/web/20160304052630/http://www.sinarmasprintawards.com/english/all.asp seems thoroughly broken). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 06:25, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
    1. Seno, Alexandra A. (2008-05-17). "The Glamour And The Gloss". Newsweek. Archived from the original on 2025-07-26. Retrieved 2025-07-26.

      The article notes: "Wearing three-inch stilettos and a giant Chanel ring on one hand, Anne Lim-Chaplain strides purposefully to a shelf in her office. The managing director of the lifestyle magazine Prestige Hong Kong picks up a prototype of her third-anniversary issue, due on newsstands in September, and tosses the 800-page volume on her desk, where it lands with a thud. Even compared with 2007's record profits, advertising for the first quarter of the year is up 41 percent. ... Peter Comparelli, editor of Prestige Hong Kong, says that he aims to uphold the standards of fairness, quality and good design, but believes readers understand who butters his bread. ... The approach is paying off handsomely: this month Comparelli's publication, which has a circulation of 30,000, offers 328 pages of beautiful frocks, as well as articles on recent soirées, the new Mercedes sedan and fine wines."

    2. "The World: Hong Kong - CR Media and 3cm launch Prestige in Hong Kong". Campaign. 2005-06-10. Archived from the original on 2025-07-26. Retrieved 2025-07-26.

      The article notes: "Prestige magazine is set to launch in Hong Kong in a joint venture between the publishers CR Media and 3cm Media. The magazine, which blends luxury lifestyle content and fashion with interests and social issues, is being launched as a direct competitor to Tatler. The editor has been named as George Paddy, the former editor of Cathay Pacific's Discovery magazine, while Brian Chow will be the publisher."

    3. Eaton, Matthew (2008-08-10). "Prestige lands with a 3 kilo thud". Marketing-Interactive. Archived from the original on 2025-07-26. Retrieved 2025-07-26.

      The article notes: "Prestige Hong Kong will celebrate its third anniversary next month by giving readers a whopping 808-page special issue, weighing in at more than 3kg. Published by Hong Kong-based entrepreneur Brian Chow, the magazine has seen a five-fold increase in advertising revenue, driven by luxury advertisers. The magazine's circulation has also grown by 50% to 30,000 copies each month."

    4. Li, Benjamin (2011-02-17). "Peter Comparelli returns to Prestige Hong Kong as Paul Ehrlich resigns". Campaign. Archived from the original on 2025-07-26. Retrieved 2025-07-26.

      The article notes: "Paul Ehrlich, the current editor of Prestige Hong Kong, an affluent lifestyle magazine published by CR Media in Singapore, will resign from the company for family related reasons, while Peter Comparelli, its former editor who left the magazine in 2008, will return to fill the editor’s post. ... CR Media took over publishing duties for Prestige Hong Kong in January 2010, pulling the license from 3cm Media."

    5. La Rosa, Erin (2012-09-19). "Kim & Khloé Kardashian Cover Prestige Magazine and Dish About Having Children and Finding "The One"". E!. Archived from the original on 2025-07-26. Retrieved 2025-07-26.

      The article notes: "Two is always better than one! At least that's what the folks at Hong Kong's edition of Prestige magazine must have thought when they paired up Kim and Khloé Kardashian to be their cover girls for the September Issue. The shoot features the two sisters in white—one of their fave colors—with Kim in a lace dress with plunging neckline and Khloé donning a sexy fitted tube dress."

    6. Less significant coverage:
      1. "Asia's luxury infatuation under pressure during economic woes". Fashion Network. Agence France-Presse. 2008-10-14. Archived from the original on 2025-07-26. Retrieved 2025-07-26.

        The article provides one sentence of coverage about the subject. The article notes: "Glossy magazines heave under the weight of high-end adverts, with a recent 808-page edition of Hong Kong-based lifestyle monthly "Prestige" tipping the scales at a handbag strap-ripping three kilograms (6.6 pounds)."

      2. "Dancing With Clouds". Macau Daily Times. 2013-10-11. p. P15.

        The article notes: "With the sound of bossa nova playing in the background, I grab a copy of Prestige Hong Kong magazine and start to read and relax, sitting back in my chair at Grand Hyatt Macau’s Lobby Lounge. On the cover is Monica Bellucci, with her full red lips and sultry smoky eyes, staring out of the magazine and looking like a goddess. ... As my fingers keep flipping through Prestige, one of the Singaporean dishes I have ordered arrives."

      3. Gottlieb, Richard, ed. (2015) [2000]. Nations of the World: A Political, Economic & Business Handbook (14 ed.). Amenia, New York: Grey House Publishing. p. 802. ISBN 978-1-61925-288-2. Retrieved 2025-07-26 – via Internet Archive.

        The book notes: "Prestige Hong Kong (www.prestigehk.com), is a glossy lifestyle and society magazine ..."

      4. Noonan, Tim (2016-12-30). "Opinion | From the editor's office to the baseball field, Peter Comparelli was a man for all seasons". South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 2025-07-26. Retrieved 2025-07-26.

        The article notes: "He left the media business temporarily to work for the Hong Kong government before coming back for two stints as editor at Prestige Hong Kong."

    There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Prestige Hong Kong to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

    Cunard (talk) 09:56, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    The "Less significant coverage" bits are not coverage at all. They are just passing mentions. Geschichte (talk) 15:57, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, could we have other editors review the recently found sources to see if they contribute to establishing notability?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:13, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Sandstein 09:50, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Milind Sovani

Milind Sovani (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Vanity page, which is mostly filled with promotional content and links to social media sites, and coverage from reliable sources is clearly lacking. Article would need to be rewritten entirely if kept. CycloneYoris talk! 08:02, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 23:08, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GreenPalm

GreenPalm (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is currently a poorly sourced brochure for this certification program. We are presented with GreenPalm's own website, a "sustainability report", and an article from "Food Navigator USA", which does not satisfy notability. I did a brief search myself, and turned up a couple of passing mentions but nothing substantial. MediaKyle (talk) 14:30, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 14:33, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Owen× ☎ 12:58, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Burger King foot lettuce

Burger King foot lettuce (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not enough significant coverage beyond a few contemporary articles released at the time of the meme's creation thus fails WP:GNG. HookFTW (talk) 09:24, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dflovett (talk) 14:55, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: This is a famous internet meme that is known across the world, and it should not be deleted after the man died. Verthecontributer (talk) 04:56, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leaning toward Delete (or Merge with Burger King, as the event is notable as something that damaged the brand's reputation.) I would argue that this subject does not yet meet WP:SUSTAINED. There was a ton of coverage immediately after the event, but later sources are not enough to indicate lasting coverage. Here's a source assessment of sources included in the article or mentioned in this discussion, but I am excluding the sources from 2012:
Source assessment table
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
Yes Yes Publication of a major newspaper No Less than one sentence mentioning a minor reference in an artwork ✘ No
Yes No Per WP:NEWSWEEK, Newsweek post-2013 is not reliable No Mentions a work about Burger King foot lettuce rather than Burger King foot lettuce itself ✘ No
Yes Yes Mainstream media, and does not have any bias surrounding Burger King foot lettuce Yes This is the most in-depth coverage of any post-2012 source, and it discusses the legacy of Burger King foot lettuce ✔ Yes
Yes No The Takeout is owned by Static Media (parent of ZergNet), a company known for churnalism Yes Whole article is about Burger King foot lettuce ✘ No
Yes Yes Mainstream media ~ Source is useful for noting the identity of Alex; however, this is an obituary, which is fairly routine coverage ~ Partial
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}}.
The last thing you'd want in your Wikipedia references is a churnalism site, but it turns out, that might be what The Takeout is. That means there is not enough SIGCOV to establish SUSTAINED. However, one could argue that the article in Stuff is SIGCOV, which would be enough to establish notability. If not, we should wait for another source to come out before this is considered notable. (In addition to these sources, I also found [7] this RS, but it's only a few sentences so not SIGCOV.) — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 19:42, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't be so quick to throw out the The Takeout as unreliable. Reliable sources (The Takeout was started by WP:AVCLUB writers, so I'm willing to say it was) do not instantly become unreliable when bought by situational or unreliable companies (see WP:POLYGON for an example, which suggests case-by-case evaluation). The writer does seem to have some experience in reliable sources (a local newspaper and Nintendo Life), and nothing in the article particularly screams churnalism at me.
I would argue that Alex's obituary in Stuff does not fall under WP:ROUTINE because Alex is not from New Zealand, nor was he a particularly prolific figure beforehand. An obituary for someone halfway across the globe would be pretty unusual territory, so I would say that this does pass SIGCOV. I'd also argue that the ACM source does not fall under WP:NOTNEWS, as it was published several months after the fact. I'd also say it's SIGCOV; while not the main topic, it does hit every major fact around the initial incident.
As one final note, WP:GEOSCOPE suggests "Coverage of an event nationally or internationally may make notability more likely, but such coverage should not be the sole basis for creating an article." In this case, we have [8][9][10][11][12], which may contribute to notability, even if they don't clear notability standards completely. Based5290 :3 (talk) 04:55, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:00, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aaron Pott

AfDs for this article:
Aaron Pott (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The entire article is filled with either unimportant information or promotional information. There seems to be no reason for him to have his own page. The biggest still existent source I could find is this small piece in forbes about his wine not even about him. Every article is about his wine and his credentials are only brought up to promote the wines.

The most notable thing about him is the prize he won, however I have no clue how notable "Food & Wine" is in the landscape of wine judging. Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 12:57, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There was a previous discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aaron Pott in 2008. It was a keep, but a weak one and only 3 participants contributes, only 2 explicitly voted.
Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 13:01, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Three articles is enough for WP:NBASIC. 🄻🄰 14:29, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 17:54, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. (non-admin closure) Cremastra (talk · contribs) 05:54, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gianduja (commedia dell'arte)

Gianduja (commedia dell'arte) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I've removed the sources of this article because they weren't related to the article itself. The page should now be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JacktheBrown (talk • contribs) 23:06, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Italian Trade Commission "Acqui or Brachetto d'Acqui (DOCG) Archived 2011-03-14 at the Wayback Machine" Italianmade.com Accessed: March 5, 2011.
  2. ^ Focus on Gianduia, Part 1.5: Orthography and Pronunciation
  3. ^ The 18th Century Stock Masks
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:31, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. (non-admin closure) Cavarrone 11:19, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gianduiotto

Gianduiotto (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

In my opinion, it makes no sense to keep two very similar articles; either delete the gianduiotto page (with only one source, which refers to Nutella (?)) or merge it with gianduja. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JacktheBrown (talk • contribs) 22:09, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - Only two non-trivial, independent pieces could be located. The only English-language hit is a single paragraph in a Guardian travel puff piece. Such routine/trivial mentions do not constitute the “significant coverage” required.Dahawk04 Talk 💬 23:22, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Italy. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 23:24, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Searching just one paper, La Stampa, on Google via "site:lastampa.it "gianduiotto"" finds plenty of coverage. More can be found in my sandbox, where I'm currently researching gianduja (chocolate). It may be good to merge the two pages, but hopefully such a discussion can be delayed until I finish digging up all relevant sources. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 02:47, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    All cited material is routine or tangential:
    • Oxford Companion to Sugar & Sweets – ~150 words inside the broader gianduja entry.
    • Kopp, Lebovitz, Roden – one-paragraph mentions in general chocolate guides.
    • Padovani Mondo Nutella – incidental, not independent of industry.
    • La Stampa hits – festival blurbs & shop promos; routine local news.
    None amount to the “significant coverage in reliable, independent sources” demanded by WP:GNG. Suitable as citations within Gianduja (chocolate), but not enough for a standalone page. Dahawk04 Talk 💬 13:32, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Putting aside discussions of the other sources, three La Stampa hits that contribute to GNG are [15][16][17]. I picked these off the first page of Google, none are close to "festival blurbs & shop promos; routine local news", they are all in depth discussions of industry and history, with significant discussion that is about gianduiotto rather than gianduja generally. I'll note per [18] that "the gianduiotto praline was the first chocolate ever to be individually wrapped."
    Dahawk04, if you would like, when I've finished the research and added sources, would you like me to notify you and you can more fully evaluate whether coverage is insufficient? There is WP:NORUSH for merging. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 13:55, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep These are very famous chocolates in Italy, originating from Turin, the Italian wiki article has many more sources, on top of that the CNN travel article that was recently added to the page and also this French article [1] show that they have received in depth coverage outside of Turin local news. Giuliotf (talk) 08:37, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:19, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Hello everybody, I'm an Italian from Piedmont. I can confirm that gianduiotti are very famous nationwide. People from Turin and in general from hazelnut producing provinces in the south of the region are proud of it, but is not just a local niche product, everybody knows them, and you can find a lot of sources just searching on the internet. I think is enough to mantain an article separate from gianduja. If this my help to clarify the notability of those chocolate, which have e precise shape and size, they are listed as PAT (see reference) by the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Forests, while gianduja is not. --Phyrexian ɸ 18:57, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was draftify‎. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 04:11, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Torta Bertolina

Torta Bertolina (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not noteworthy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JacktheBrown (talk • contribs) 12:08, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete with weak support for Draftify. There isn't much substantial information I could find and the current page is a sparsely sourced stub
Dahawk04 Talk 💬 19:21, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Draftify or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:51, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A quick google turned up a lot of pages with mentions of this cake. I don't work on food article so I can't judge what can be used to prove notability, but seems like it should be possible to find something if someone is willing to look. Propose to Draftify as it seems that a dedicated editor would be able to improve the article to the point where it would meet the standards for inclusion. Giuliotf (talk) 21:37, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Editors can argue about a possible Redirect target article on the article talk page. But I'm going to close this discussion as it won't be resolved here. Liz Read! Talk! 05:51, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Flies' graveyard

Flies' graveyard (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No apparent significant coverage, just passing mentions. This and multiple variations (fly cakes, fly pies, fly cemetery) appear to be no more than a general nickname for any pastry that contains currants or raisins, almost none of which have articles. Maybe redirect to Garibaldi biscuit? Valereee (talk) 23:31, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 00:06, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect - to Gur cake, which is essentially the Irish name for the same confection as a fruit slice. Although Eccles cake is similar, and is often referred to as "dead fly cake", searching on this title mostly finds this as a term used for the Scottish confection that is substantially the same as the Irish one, and I am not sure if Eccles cake is ever referred to by this name (equally, Garibaldi and fruit shortcake biscuits are dead fly biscuits, but not this). The Gur cake page already mentions the name. There is a fruit slice DAB already, so Necrothesp's suggestion cannot be enacted, and, in any case, we have no sources here, and we have a sourced page about the same confection, so this is a content fork driven by the informal name. Pinging Orange sticker to see if they agree. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:27, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There are too many suggested target article redirects.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:19, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I don't see how one redirect target could be chosen, therefore this needs to be a disambiguation page with all the suggestions listed. Geschichte (talk) 15:52, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Gur cake, this and fruit slice are all names for the same thing. The current disambiguation at Fruit slice lists this, Gur cake and Fruit snack. But Fruit snack makes no mention of this name, nor of fruit slice. Eccles cake similarly doesn't mention it. Garibaldi biscuits did, but the name is not in the cited source, which calls them dead fly biscuits or squashed fly biscuits. I have fixed that page now. So it seems to me that the solution is really that the Fruit Slice is the primary topic for a single confection that is called a Fruit Slice and Gur Cake (and Cacen Pwdin in Wales and Flies graveyard too). Rather than a disambiguation, a merge makes much more sense. Merge Gur cake and Flies graveyard into Fruit slice, overwriting the unnecessary disambiguation. Eccles cake and Garibaldi biscuits should be see alsos. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 19:09, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 07:56, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The VIP List

The VIP List (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet notability guidelines. Article is of low quality as well. Joejose1 (talk) 11:30, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 12:09, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 17:57, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Shazi Visram. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 03:46, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Family (food company)

Happy Family (food company) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I came across this article after seeing Draft:HealthyBaby at AfC. I don't see anything here except primary sources, passing mentions, and routine coverage. In my WP:BEFORE I was unable to find any independent, secondary coverage upon which to build an article. The article history suggests that this was created for promotional purposes, and its primary author is blocked for "inappropriate emails". MediaKyle (talk) 20:05, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The first is not as it is written by a contributor. The second looks like some kind of blog of commercial website so would not see it as reliable. The third, byline from an editor, from Inc. would be in-depth and reliable. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:10, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 05:37, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:45, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Purge server cache

Proposed deletions

Templates for Discussion

  1. ^ Fabrice Liégard (13 December 2021). ":Transfrontières : le gianduiotto, un petit "lingot d'or" piémontais, roi des chocolats de Noël en Italie". France Info (in French).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Food_and_drink&oldid=1301823485"