Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Food and drink

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.

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:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Food and drink/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Food and drink

Aaron Pott

AfDs for this article:

(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]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Food and drink, and Wine. 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: Article by their Senior Wine Critic [1] and here [2]. Article badly needs updating though. Oaktree b (talk) 14:09, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Three articles is enough for WP:NBASIC. 🄻 🄰 14:29, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: France and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:35, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gianduja (commedia dell'arte)

(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]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Italy. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:25, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of the fate of this page, it was improper to delete the entire contents. I restored the last content that was cut, except its irrelevant reference. References used before cutdown by nom were: ^[1]^[2]^[3]. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 00:28, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Italian Trade Commission "Acqui or Brachetto d'Acqui (DOCG) Archived 2011-03-14 at the Wayback Machine" Italianmade.com Accessed: March 5, 2011.
^ Focus on Gianduia, Part 1.5: Orthography and Pronunciation
^ The 18th Century Stock Masks

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Theatre. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 00:30, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: it:Gianduja has plenty of sources, including full length books. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 02:52, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nonsense unreferenced stub, or move to Wiktionary. If you want to save this article. Nothing would be lost by deleting this stub. If this is a notable subject, then someone who care about it should write something coherent. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:28, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There was a coherent article there previously. To the nominator: Next time I would suggest using other tags like {{citation needed}} if you're having trouble finding reliable sources to verify unsourced claims. ("Link doesn't work" is also not always a reason to delete references outright; often, those very links can be recovered via the Wayback Machine and other tools.) Cielquiparle (talk) 06:24, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and keep improving. The Italian version of the article has many sources. Cielquiparle (talk) 05:25, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The article is now re-expanded and fully sourced now. Book sources were easily found on the Internet Archive like this one. Cielquiparle (talk) 06:50, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural keep as "I've removed the sources, the page should now be deleted" is not a valid reason for deletion. What happened to WP:BEFORE? Even a cursory glance at the relevant Italian wikipedia page (and its extensive bibliography) makes it clear the topic is (extremely) notable. Kudos to Cielquiparle for improving the page. --Cavarrone 11:31, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I don't see a reason to delete. It's a start of an article. I've seen much, much worse kept. Bearian (talk) 20:42, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gianduiotto

(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 [3][4][5]. 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 [6] 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]

Torta Bertolina

(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]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Italy. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 21:32, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Yates

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

Most current references barely touch on him as a person or are entirely about his vending machine company. Maxim and Forbes cites are the best, but they read as puff pieces. Matt Deres (talk) 20:23, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Matt Deres (talk) 20:23, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:55, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:18, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Heny Sison

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

Unreferenced BLP for years. Fails WP:GNG. Previously tagged as BLPPROD but apparently WP:ELs count as refs. EL are the person's official website and the TV network's official website that is now dead. Howard the Duck (talk) 16:23, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Television, and Philippines. Howard the Duck (talk) 16:23, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Food and drink. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:24, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Obviously failed WP:GNG and there's no source applied on the article. ROY is WAR Talk! 15:06, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Flies' graveyard

(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]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Valereee (talk) 23:31, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:39, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but rename to Fruit slice, which appears to be the commonest name. They're definitely a thing, but this is far from being the commonest name for them. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:13, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect I would redirect to Eccles Cake but I imagine there might be some dispute between regional editors over the correct target. Orange sticker (talk) 15:06, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Orange sticker, perhaps a DAB? Valereee (talk) 12:04, 10 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]

Keep but rename - too easy to confuse with WikiProject Cemeteries. — Maile (talk) 13:53, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The VIP List

(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]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Internet, and New York. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:42, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:23, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The sources from Vice, Rolling Stone, Delish, and Bon Appetit seem sufficient for WP:GNG. Jumpytoo Talk 18:32, 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]

Happy Family (food company)

(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]

Delete not much growth or coverage since 2012. Author was also found to be a sockpuppet of Morning277. Looks purely promo so should be on the chopping block imo Burroughs'10 (talk) 20:08, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Companies. Shellwood (talk) 21:22, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I can find independent sources on this company: [7], [8], [9]. The third is probably RS, but I don't know about the other two. Based on the other articles they publish, they look rather uncritical and fluffy. If these sources could be shown to be RS, I would suggest keep. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 21:26, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:24, 3 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]

Redirect - to Shazi Visram. The majority of the sources focus on her and the founding of the company, such as this and even the Inc. reference mentioned previously. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:15, 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]

Catch (brand)

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

Catch seems to be one of the brands of Dharampal Satyapal Group. This article openly contains promotional texts of it that are being presented as an encyclopedic entry, which goes against WP:NOT, particularly WP:NOTADVERT and WP:ADMASQ, ofcourse. Even if we suggest a merge with the company article as a WP:ATD option, it still doesn't make much sense to move promo text from one page to another. A couple of lines about it already exist in the history section. Charlie (talk) 06:44, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products, India, and Uttar Pradesh. Charlie (talk) 06:44, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:01, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The citations presented are OK and will pass notability guidelines. In particular, the articles in The Hindu Business Line, Business Standard, and Financial Express provide significant independent coverage. Yolandagonzales (talk) 06:30, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
All the articles are meant to promote the subject, and the last one from Financial Express was written by their BrandWagon team. Please visit and read WP:RSNOI. Charlie (talk) 11:30, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 07:09, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Most of the Indian family uses Catch spices. For me it is a notable brand. There are significant references like this establish the WP:NCORP. And Advertorial tone can be improved. LKBT (talk) 12:21, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Dharampal Satyapal Group: the company that owns the brand. As the nom says, the target already covers the brand as extensively as is encyclopedically warranted. How familiar participants here are with the brand is immaterial. Owen× ☎ 14:29, 13 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) 15:40, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Dharampal Satyapal Group. While a seemingly a notable product, all the references cited here are very obviously advertising vehicles; citing the original nomination's concern of WP:NOTADVERT and WP:ADMASQ. MayhemStoppingBy (talk) 18:55, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drinah Nyirenda

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

Subject fails WP:GNG and WP:PROF. No evidence of significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Article is based on sparse and trivial references with no clear demonstration of notability. THE ONE PEOPLE (talk) 18:52, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and Africa. THE ONE PEOPLE (talk) 18:52, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Food and drink, and Animal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:24, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, the PROF test works against administrators rather than researchers. Bearian (talk) 14:02, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, James of UR (talk) 00:08, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment WP:NPROF allows for notability of professors who've held a named-professorship, distinguished professorship or the equivalent in an institution/nation/culture where distinguished and named are rarely used. I do not know the Zambian university system. If her professorships are/were the Zambian equivalent of distinguished, we should keep. Elemimele (talk) 12:25, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree, but there's nothing currently in the article that suggests that. (not voting either way) -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 23:05, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:41, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reluctant Delete - Wikipedia is very underrepresented in terms of academics from southern Africa, but there just is not enough sourcing in the article to demonstrate a pass for WP:PROF or WP:GNG even with a pretty inclusionist reading. Quotes by the subject are more about the projects and ministries than about the significance of her directorship. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 19:26, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Purge server cache

Proposed deletions

Templates for Discussion

[Italian-made-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

[1]

[2]

[3]