- 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. Liz Read! Talk! 21:41, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Edible (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
While obviously a well-known and notable topic, fails per WP:NOTDICT. People are just more likely to search up "edible" elsewhere, to be frank. KrystalInfernus (talk) 21:40, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:07, 21 March 2025 (UTC)
- Weak keep, the concerns raised by the nominator do not seem to need solving by deletion. Geschichte (talk) 05:05, 21 March 2025 (UTC)
- Keep - it's a weird little stub, but it's got three reliable sources. I don't see why it must be blown up, which is essentially the argument. I'm willing to change my mind, but I'd also like to hear from the foodies. Bearian (talk) 00:47, 23 March 2025 (UTC)
- Keep - Few of the sources look independent and give significant coverage about the topic. This word also deserves from medical point of view where this is used more often to describe objects. will go with Bearian (talk). Rahmatula786 (talk) 13:55, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
- 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.