Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Food and drink

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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

[edit]

Korv Stroganoff

[edit]
Korv Stroganoff (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)

Regional varieties of Stroganoff are already listed in the Beef Stroganoff article. Korv Stroganoff is already mentioned in Beef_Stroganoff#Nordic_countries and its typical ingredients and serving methods are adequately summarised there.

The citations used in this article are also primarily from supermarket websites and cooking recipe blogs; not (WP:RELIABLE). Lea 4545 (talk) 10:00, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely not. Revise the information in the Stroganof article instead.Blockhaj (talk)

Keep. From a quick search there appears to be enough coverage in Swedish RS to support notability (and I am not counting any recipes). Remember that article quality is not a reason for deletion. Sjö (talk) 10:45, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To further note, majority of the recipies are from major supermarkets. Also, if i remember correctly, when i made the article i added separate doublets for all claims. So in short, "not WP:reliable" does not apply. Blockhaj (talk) 10:50, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Then Merge: The deletion proposal was not based on subject notability, nor primarily on article quality. The topic is already adequately covered in the Beef Stroganoff article, making a separate page unnecessary. This constitutes a unacceptable type of content fork per WP:REDUNDANTFORK.
Per WP:PAGEDECIDE: "At times it is better to cover a notable topic as part of a larger page about a broader topic, with more context." This applies here, as Korv Stroganoff is a regional variant of Beef Stroganoff and benefits from being presented within the broader context of related variations. Lea 4545 (talk) 12:07, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Korv Stroganoff only derives from Beef Stroganoff, but it is its own dish. It is a completely different staple in Sweden and Finland. With this logic it makes more sense to merge Haggis into Pölsa, as the former is just a lamb variant of it. Blockhaj (talk) 12:52, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Korvstroganoff is a separate dish. It has a distinct role in Swedish society (essentially a kids' meal), very different from the role Beef Stroganoff plays in other Western countries. --Soman (talk) 20:41, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Korenya Shingetsuan

[edit]
Korenya Shingetsuan (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 in-depth coverage to show it passes WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 15:27, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thapaswini Poonacha

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Thapaswini Poonacha (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)

Declined G4. Non-notable actress. This version of the article is drastically different from the previous version which was deleted in 2022. Although it's still in very poor shape, and would need to be completely rewritten if kept. Fails WP:NACTOR. CycloneYoris talk! 21:57, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Response to AfD Discussion: Thapaswini Poonacha
I oppose the deletion of this article on the grounds that Thapaswini Poonacha meets Wikipedia’s notability criteria for actors (WP:NACTOR) and has received significant coverage in multiple independent, reliable sources.
1. Notability as an Actress
Thapaswini Poonacha has been featured in multiple Kannada films, including:
Hari Kathe Alla Giri Kathe (2022) – Available on JioCinema
Gajarama (2025) – Upcoming release on February 7, 2025
Mr. Jack – Upcoming, co-starring Guru Nandan
Rukmini Vasantha – Upcoming, co-starring Shree Mahadev
She has received media attention for her performances and won the Chittara Promising Star Award, which is a notable recognition in the Kannada film industry.
2. Significant Media Coverage
Multiple independent and reliable sources have covered her career and achievements, demonstrating significant coverage beyond passing mentions:
Times of India:
"I do my research before signing a film"
"Not about numbers, want to do memorable movies"
"Roles have to make my soul happy"
The New Indian Express:
"I have no interest in chasing attention"
Kannada Prabha:
"Thapaswini Poonacha: I have no interest in chasing attention"
Hindustan Times Kannada:
"Thapaswini Poonacha in Christmas photoshoot"
These sources demonstrate that Thapaswini Poonacha is consistently covered in reputable media, indicating her notability as an actress and public figure.
3. Business and Coffee Industry Recognition
In addition to her acting career, she is a certified coffee cup tester and runs a coffee business in Coorg. This has been discussed in interviews and media coverage, adding to her notability beyond acting.
4. Conclusion
Thapaswini Poonacha meets WP:NACTOR by virtue of:
✅ Multiple roles in notable Kannada films
✅ Award recognition (Chittara Promising Star Award)
✅ Significant, independent media coverage
✅ Additional recognition in the coffee industry
Given the multiple reliable sources and her growing career in Kannada cinema, deletion is not justified. If improvements are needed, I encourage a rewrite instead of deletion. Akashmdp (talk) 16:37, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agree on multiple roles in notable Kannada films, which is enough for a standalone page, but would you happen to have a source for the award, by any chance? -Mushy Yank. 17:40, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Seen the Youtube video. Added it. A better source might be needed for that, but as notability does not depend on that point (but on her 2 roles), not urgent. Advising you no to repeat the same things nor add long walls of text here or on the page. -Mushy Yank. 18:20, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: 2 significant roles in (2) notable films (the second has no page yet but at least 3 bylined reviews [see page]) have her meet the requirements for WP:NACTRESS. I have cleaned up the page. -Mushy Yank. 17:20, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep – Thapaswini Poonacha meets WP:NACTRESS by having significant roles in two notable films:
    Hari Kathe Alla Giri Kathe (2022) – Recognized and covered in mainstream Kannada media.
    Gajarama (2025) – While the film does not yet have its own Wikipedia page, it has received at least three bylined reviews from reliable sources.
    Additionally, she has been profiled in multiple independent, reliable sources, including:
    Times of India (article)
    New Indian Express (article)
    Kannada Prabha (article)
    Hindustan Times Kannada (article)
    Her acting career and coffee business have been independently covered, reinforcing her notability beyond just press releases or promotional content. The page has been cleaned up to meet Wikipedia’s neutrality and sourcing guidelines.
    Thus, per WP:GNG and WP:NACTRESS, the article should be kept. Akashmdp (talk) 18:00, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The Kannada Prabha piece is more interview. The Vinay Lokesh piece is also interview. These aren't nearly enough, IMHO. I don't see a single presented source which isn't routine entertainment news, mostly quotes. No direct detailing at all. To Akashmdp, repeating your bullet points over and over doesn't make your argument any stronger. You may be convinced, but you need to convince the other editors in this discussion. BusterD (talk) 18:14, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete User:Akashmdp is the page creator AND a paid contributor to this page. As for the sources already applied on the page, cite #2 (Asianet Suvarna News) admits it's a Kannada translation of The Times of India link (cite #1). Both consist entirely of identical quotes from the subject. Interviews do not count towards GNG. The two movie reviews are both (parenthetical) bare mentions, but do confirm the single role. Cite #5 is also an interview with a few bits of routine industry news. The photoshoot linked above is five pics of her in same outfit next to quotes from the actress. If this is all an avowed digital marketing professional with 7+ years of experience in the industry can bring, it's not very impressive to me. BusterD (talk) 17:56, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    For full disclosure, I was the administrator who declined the speedy deletion tag earlier. BusterD (talk) 17:59, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – Meets WP:NACTRESS and WP:GNG.
    I would like to address the concerns raised by User:BusterD regarding notability and sources.
    1. Significant Roles in Multiple Notable Films
      • Hari Kathe Alla Giri Kathe (2022) – A commercially released Kannada film with media coverage.
      • Gajarama (2025) – Upcoming film, already receiving pre-release coverage.
      • Mr. Jack & Rukmini Vasantha – Both announced, with media mentions. Under WP:NACTRESS, an actor needs two significant roles in notable films, which she meets.
    2. Coverage in Reliable, Independent Sources
      • Times of India: Multiple interviews and feature stories.
      • New Indian Express: Independent reporting on her career.
      • Hindustan Times (Kannada): Coverage of her work.
      • Kannada Prabha: Career analysis and industry perspectives. Response to the Source Criticism:
      • The Times of India article is a primary source, but it is still independent and features her career insights.
      • The Asianet Suvarna News article may translate TOI but does not invalidate other sources.
      • Movie reviews confirm her roles, fulfilling minimum WP:NACTRESS requirements.
      • The New Indian Express piece is not just an interview; it provides analysis of her trajectory.
      • Photoshoot coverage, while not the strongest evidence, still indicates media attention.
    3. Regarding Paid Editing Allegations
      • While User:Akashmdp may have created the page, the subject’s notability stands independently.
      • Wikipedia has a system for COI disclosures, but that does not automatically invalidate an article’s merits.
      • Even if a paid editor initiated the page, the subject’s career must be evaluated separately from who added the content.
    4. Conclusion
      • Thapaswini Poonacha meets both WP:GNG and WP:NACTRESS based on her coverage and career milestones.
      • The article has been cleaned up to remove promotional tone and improve sourcing.
      • If further citations or refinements are needed, that can be worked on, but outright deletion is unnecessary.
    Thus, the article should be kept. Akashmdp (talk) 18:12, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Now you're screaming. You have made your argument. Let others speak. Mushy Yank can be helpful here. Consult with them. BusterD (talk) 18:16, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -Mushy Yank. 20:01, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Passes Wp:GNG and Wp:NACTRESS. Multiple significant roles in notable movies and multiple significant coverage in WP:RS, both are available. Zuck28 (talk) 01:34, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep: As per above discussion and my search on the subject find this: [1], [2], [3] B-Factor (talk) 12:41, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Weak Keep
    Thank you, B-Factor, for your input. The references you provided—Times of India, Cinema Express, and The New Indian Express—are credible sources that establish Thapaswini Poonacha’s notability as an actress in Kannada cinema.
    These sources provide coverage of her career, film roles, and interviews, which meet Wikipedia’s General Notability Guidelines (GNG). Additionally, her role in upcoming films like Gajarama shows ongoing relevance.
    I believe the page should be retained, but I am open to improving it by adding more citations or restructuring content for better compliance with Wikipedia standards.
    Looking forward to further discussion. Akashmdp (talk) 17:47, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Akashmdp Is your !vote Keep or Weak Keep? (You don't need to repeat identical arguments over and over, even if it's to thank someone -we understood your point, I guess-, which is perfectly fine, though) Inviting you to "remove" your "Weak Keep" above (with strikethrough) (So that it appears Weak Keep) if your !vote (the only thing that should be bolded (theorically :D) in a !vote) is indeed Keep. And Gajarama is NOT an upcoming film, mind you. It was released in February and has received multiple reviews in reliable media outlets, this being one of the main arguments (with her other significant role) in favour of retention of the page. -Mushy Yank. 18:53, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello, thank you for your kind suggestion. Yes, I was confused. Gajarams is released. I am sorry for that. Should I update that in the page? Also, there is no option to remove keep with strike. Should I send new reply regarding that? Akashmdp (talk) 15:55, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It’s OK, done it for you. The film is clearly indicated as released in the article so there’s no problem. -Mushy Yank. 17:57, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much. If you don’t mind, can you tell me what should I do next? Is the article live? Nomination header is still there. Akashmdp (talk) 18:26, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just be patient :D. The discussion will take place until April 9 at least. The nomination tag will remain until the discussion is closed and a consensus (to retain/delete/redirect/draftify) is clear. Nothing to do in particular here; feel free to list new sources on the talk page if you find some and think they are useful to expand the page. Best, -Mushy Yank. 18:58, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In the meantime, if you wish and can, you could upload a quality photograph of this actress if you can find one that corresponds to the guidelines explained in Wikipedia:Images. Be particularly mindful of copyright and legal issues if you can find one. Please note that the potential insertion of an image is totally unrelated to notability questions and that it will not change a thing in the current discussion. -Mushy Yank. 19:09, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Passes WP:NACTRESS who has worked as female lead in two films that have been released. Page needs to be improved though with secondary independent reliable sources. Sources with interviews are not independent of the subject. RangersRus (talk) 15:16, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]
PopUp Bagels (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)

Fails WP:NCORP. Refs are PR and routine business news. scope_creepTalk 19:27, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quite frankly, I would prefer to stay out of the below issue of questionable sourcing. But it should be noted that article creator User:Bubblegum111 is a student editor at Northeastern University, and was supervised by a Peer counselor on the project. One of the peer review items is a section on "Sources and References, Guiding questions." While there does not seem to be any details on that last one, I'm willing to assume good faith on both that editor and their process. However, an editor below seems to think the sourcing was promotional. I prefer to assume good faith that both a university student and supervisor in the same city as the business would know what is planted hype and what is not. — Maile (talk) 16:30, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't. I rely on long experience of bad decisions made by Wikied folk that resulted in their articles being to sent to Afd. This article is a highly promotional advert that breaks the Terms of Use, on a business, where all the information is straight from the CEO. Not from any journalistic process or discovery. Its mostly verbatim from press-releases and the company website and hearsay. scope_creepTalk 08:45, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They are PR and advert or press-releases. There is no reference 7. Ref 6 is a funding round which fails WP:SIRS. The NY article is a clear interview with the CEO as PR. It fails WP:SIRS and WP:ORGIND, as well. scope_creepTalk
  • Comment The core of it is that your so used to seeing this crap paid-for journalism, that you think once it appears in NY Times then it somehow valid. Its not. It paid-for advert. The business is too new to be really notable with associated secondary sources. The fact the guy has paid $40k-$60k for the written up story/advert, which is 2021 rate (don't know what it is now) seems to be not worth thinking about. The Entrepreneur is exactly the same. A paid-for advert. scope_creepTalk 14:07, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I didn't think the NYT wrote paid adverts. Mrfoogles (talk) 05:53, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Look for the advertisements costings website. scope_creepTalk 06:44, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I am the student's instructor and tend to be an inclusionist. That isn't to say the article couldn't be improved, but I think it is a good start and additional sources will continue to be published as the company continues to expand. - Reagle (talk) 19:24, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fairly clear keep -- article is well-sourced to several reliable sources. The rationale for this proposal seems to be that the NYTimes coverage is paid-for, with no clear evidence of that? Unless there is clear proof all the sources used in this article were paid for by the business, it seems worth keeping. Even if the NYTimes article was paid for, to be honest it's likely not false, given that it's the NYT. Mrfoogles (talk) 05:14, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your rationalising it and not looking at the evidence. scope_creepTalk 08:41, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Then why is the article so heavily promotional and biased, almost as though its been purposly designed. Its a brochure advertisement plain and simple. Does it say anywhere when you come on to Wikipedia that its an advertising platform? When I signed up for Wikipedia, did I expect to see 100% content company sources and words taken directly from the words spoken from the company ceo and copied verbatim. I find it really odd that the editor who wrote this doesn't understand the process or the policies their writing under. scope_creepTalk 06:44, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Even the rationale at User:Reagle/proposed topics#Candidate Topic #1: PopUp Bagels sounds breathlessly promotional. scope_creepTalk 06:59, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: This is a pretty clear pass of WP:NCORP, the NYT and Boston Globe articles are not paid advertisements, just significant food reviews of new popular restaurants. That's 2 right there. I don't know enough about the Nation's Restaurant News website to make a judgement on it for establishing notability. This is a student newspaper but I think it is still useful as it doesn't have any quotes by the founder and is clearly not paid advertising either.
I took a look at the article when you tagged it and that version was quite promotional, but it is a very different article now. Moritoriko (talk) 03:11, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi everyone. I am the editor/creator of this article, and I wanted to chime in. As a Wikipedia novice, the process of drafting, creating, and revising an article has been daunting. Thank you to those who have contributed to this discussion, I appreciate all of your feedback! Like my professor @Reagle said, I know this article has been docked for its promotional tone, and I have been working hard to edit my sources and work so it can align with Wikipedia's NPOV guidelines. I frequently posted in the Teahouse for counsel, and received a lot of valuable help. As this is an upcoming business, I understand that there are not as many notable sources as existing restaurant chains. However, I can assure that this was written in good faith, and I am committed to continuing to improve my work.
Bubblegum111 (talk) 13:48, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bonaqua

[edit]
Bonaqua (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)

Zero in-depth sourcing from independent, reliable sources. Redirect was reverted with the rationale, "Bonaqua isn't a really known brand and it doesn't have major companies as sources. There are plenty similar pages with less in depth analysis and evidence. I believe Onel shouldn't just delete someone's entire page based of their own personal opinion. The facts are as accurate as they get, it's literally from Swire's own website. With this said, DO NOT DELETE THIS PAGE AGAIN." However, without in-depth sourcing, does not pass WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 21:39, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 TT me 21:39, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Hong Kong. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 21:44, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Bonaqua appears to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Independent and reliable sources, such as Retail Asia, Marketing Interactive, Macau Business, and Taiwan News, provide significant coverage of the brand, particularly its market leadership in Hong Kong (verified by Nielsen data) and its notable sustainability initiatives like the launch of label-less bottles and returnable glass bottles. The brand has also received industry awards for its sustainability efforts. While the current Wikipedia article relies heavily on primary sources, the existence of substantial independent coverage demonstrates that the topic is notable and verifiable. The article should be improved by incorporating these independent sources. --Xrimonciam (talk) 08:47, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Could you please supply those sources? Onel5969 TT me 15:37, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Xrimonciam (talk · contribs), would you provide a summary of or links to the sources you found as that would strengthen your argument for retention? Thank you. Cunard (talk) 21:13, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional keep, at worst draftify. The entry is false in that Bonaqua is sold in many other places than Hong Kong. For instance in Norway, where it is a long-lasting and ubiquitous water brand in segments such as natural mineral water and flavored non-carbonated water. Here is some coverage, mainly about how the production in Fyresdal was set up: [4] [5] [6]. The market shares are often covered, this regards Bonaqua's challenge towards the two market leaders, Ringnes' Imsdal [no] and Hansa Borg's Olden (water) [no]. [7] As a curiosity, here are two product tests from Dagens Næringsliv, in which Bonaqua scored 3 points out of 10, one point lower than tapwater. [8] [9]. It is bad that the article currently has these dreadful sources, something should be done in order to strengthen my keep stance. Geschichte (talk) 09:05, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    How about, we change the title to Bonaqua (Hong Kong). Now, mostly the page is written by me. I do agree that the sources are lacking but it doesnt justify just deleting the whole thing. As a Hong Konger, Bonaqua is a water brand of Hong Kong. Its distribution in Hong Kong is handled by Swire, not coca cola and the Bonaqua sold in other countries arent exactly the same as ours, therefore i believe they're not even the same brand but just different projects by coca cola under the same product name? SmartDio97 (talk) 13:39, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    If you have independent sources that detail all of that info, we would be well on our way to keeping the article Geschichte (talk) 06:52, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Coca Cola (or Swire if that is more appropriate). None of the sources in the article are independent, and I do not find independent sources. Draftify More sources have been found although none are extensive. For example, the Norwegian ones listed here are routine company news. It is possible that when the article is expanded to include more of the markets for this product that the sum of the sources will reach GNG/NCORP. Lamona (talk) 03:18, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
that's some low writesmenship SmartDio97 (talk) 13:42, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me, was that a comment to me? Lamona (talk) 03:19, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
    1. The sources found by Geschichte.
    2. Manning, Paul (2012). The Semiotics of Drink and Drinking. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group. pp. 86–87, 92–93, 227. ISBN 978-1-4411-3774-6. Retrieved 2025-04-06 – via Internet Archive.

      The book notes on page 87: "I will begin with a discussion of the newer, and more familiar, of the two products, purified waters like BonAqua, turning then to natural mineral waters whose properties, stabilized in the nineteenth century, are largely continued under socialism by Borjomi. ... The qualities of BonAqua: One of the qualities that is central to all drinking water is purity, meaning first and foremost that water is wholesome and safe to drink. But of all the different forms of water that fit this description, only one relatively recent variety emerging in America in the 1990s — ‘purified’ bottled waters like BonAqua — is actually marketed in specifically these terms."

      The book notes on page 92: "BonAqua, by contrast, is like most other product names in that it is a trademark, referring to a specific, non-geographically localized personalistic producer, a firm or undertaking (Schechter 1927, Davis 2008, Bently 2008). Geographical indications (Borjomi) and trademarks (BonAqua) do similar semiotic work ..."

      The book notes on page 93: "By contrast, BonAqua is like many contemporary Western brand names in that it conjures up a vague almost Esperanto-like hint of descriptiveness, which might just be translated as ‘good water’ if there were any Romance language (including Esperanto) in which Bon Aqua meant ‘good water’, which there is not. By contrast, the Western version of the brand name, Dasani, is purely arbitrary, apparently chosen when consumer testing revealed that the name suggested ‘purity’ and ‘replenishment’. The point is that neither name is descriptive of any product qualities (therefore, not technically referentially misleading), but both are felt, in different ways, to be suggestive of some of the product qualities."

      The book notes on page 227: "This brand is also known as BonAqua/BonAqa/Bonaqua in different parts of Europe, Asia, Africa and Eurasia, and Aquabona in Spain."

    3. Wong, Chi Bo; Law, Monica; Wu, Wing Chi Branda (2023). "Determinants of Customer Loyalty: A Green Marketing Perspective". In Chen, Fanyu; Choo, Keng Soon William; Voon, Hsien Lee; Chooi, Yi Wei (eds.). Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Business, Accounting, Finance and Economics (BAFE 2022). Paris: Atlantis Press. ISBN 978-2-4940-6999-2. Retrieved 2025-04-06 – via Google Books.

      The book notes on page 448: "The green product investigated in this research is Bonaqua, a bottled water brand in Hong Kong. In response to the changing behaviours of Bonaqua’s consumers, the firm has set an example by launching a comprehensive green marketing campaign that includes a mode of repackaging that involves the reduction of plastic bottle waste and the rolling out of environmental advertisements to reinforce the firm’s green efforts and positioning in the market."

      The book notes on pages 456–457: "This result implies Bonaqua must implement measures to improve green customer satisfaction as a means of enhancing green customer loyalty. ... The findings indicated that no significant positive relationship exists in the green product quality-loyalty link. For Bonaqua, this finding implies that customers who highly value green product quality may not necessarily decide to repurchase the brand’s products in the future. ... This research suggests that Bonaqua’s green corporate image is insufficient ensuring repeat brand patronage ... The findings imply that Bonaqua’s green customer satisfaction can be boosted via green trust. ... The potential lack of customer loyalty toward Bonaqua may be attributed to perceptions of greenwashing (Go Green Hong Kong, 2014)."

    4. Vijayraghavan, Kala; Chakravarty, Chaitali (2007-07-30). "Upset with bottlers, Coke to bring Bonaqua". The Economic Times. Archived from the original on 2025-04-06. Retrieved 2025-04-06.

      The article notes: "Hindustan Coca-Cola Bottling (HCCB), the bottling unit of Coca-Cola in India, is launching Bonaqua, a water brand from Coke’s global stable. Bonaqua in all probability will end up competing with Coke’s existing water brand Kinley. ... Coke has two international bottled waters: Dasani, which is sold predominantly in North and South America, and Bonaqua, available mainly in Europe. Dasani was first introduced in 1999. Bonaqua has been around since the late 1980s."

    There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Bonaqua to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".

    Cunard (talk) 01:44, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at each of these and although you found better sources than most, I still only barely see these as significant. I'm coming around to Geschichte's view that the article may be a keeper but it needs to be about the brand in all of the markets, not just Hong Kong. (The suggestion to make this BonAqua Hong Kong doesn't seem viable to me.) Also, this brand appears in the List of Coca-Cola brands article, but not in the The Coca-Cola Company article itself. Some of the brands are named in that article and BonAqua might fit into one of its sections. So I'm leaning toward draftify as the article is critically incomplete. I fear that if we leave it as a stub that it'll come back to AfD in this same condition. Lamona (talk) 03:13, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the article should cover the brand in all markets, not just Hong Kong, since there is extensive coverage about the brand's being sold in many places outside Hong Kong. Cunard (talk) 21:13, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting in the hope that we can find some more sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 03:11, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FindSALT

[edit]
FindSALT (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 propose the deletion of the FindSALT Wikipedia page due to its lack of notability, as it relies on limited sources that do not provide substantial independent coverage or establish its significance within the restaurant industry. Mapsama (talk) 13:36, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]


  • Lean Keep I lean toward keeping this article. There is independent coverage in gulf news and Conde Nast traveler. The fact that someone had to clarify that the restaurant in london is not from UAE also suggests notability to me.

Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 22:07, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:06, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:20, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Verwurelter

Purge server cache

Proposed deletions

[edit]

Templates for Discussion

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Food_and_drink&oldid=1284399043"