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

Michael Booth (writer)

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

Notability tag up for very many years. Jw93d59 (talk) 20:51, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 21:22, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Journalism, Travel and tourism, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:13, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Minnesotan desserts

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

List is mostly unsourced and few, if any, are unique or exclusive to the state of Minnesota. I have made and eaten some of these in the Canadian Arctic. It violates Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a directory. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 23:59, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Lists, and Minnesota. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:04, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Mostly WP:OR and most entries are not unique to Minnesota. Ajf773 (talk) 00:28, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Kahlo157, you made the list at Cuisine of Minnesota#Desserts and pastries – why exactly does this need to be a redundant, duplicate page?? As was said, many of these are eaten across the country, so I encourage you to continue work on that article but clean it up to be only those most emblematic of Minnesota cuisine, ideally with more contextual prose. Reywas92^Talk 01:55, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I created this page, and am currently working on one for dishes of Minnesota in an effort to conform the cuisine of Minnesota page to be more like the the style of other cuisine pages (Italian cuisine, cuisine of Quebec etc) which have a short list of notable foods followed by a separate page listing all of the foods within the cuisine. I am assuming the food you are referring to that is eaten across the country is the blueberry muffin, which I only included because it is the state muffin. That being said it is eaten throughout the country so I will take it off. Thanks for the feedback. Kahlo157 (talk) 15:11, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A section of desserts in Cuisine of Minnesota with ones that are relevant to the state is fine. So listing bundt cakes, Pie à la Mode, and blueberry muffins which are relevant as they were invented there and one is the state muffin. However, things like marzipan, rice pudding, and dessert bars are eaten world wide and not particularly associated with one state in the US and make it an indiscriminate list. Any other list of desserts by sub-national entity should also probably be deleted. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 00:03, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Christina Woerner McInnis

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

The subject does not appear to meet WP:GNG or WP:POLITICIAN. Coverage is primarily local (AL.com, Yellowhammer News, Gulf Coast Media, Business Alabama), and some sources are routine or promotional (corporate profiles, campaign site, Lowe’s Corporate). There is little in-depth, independent secondary coverage to demonstrate enduring encyclopedic notability. Setwardo (talk) 15:58, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as author, sources like AL.com, Yellowhammer, and Business Alabama are not what I would consider local coverage, covering the entire state rather than this simple local area. Press-Register would be something considered local, covering areas from the county over. Lowe's and the personal website are not meant to be sources that would qualify as GNG. Some sources (Alabama News Center, WBRC) only mention the subject in passing. Does not meant NPOL, but that is (at least currently) not a defining point in her career. Overall sources covering her and her activities are enough to meet the general notability guideline. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 16:08, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 August 24. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:14, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, Women, Food and drink, and Alabama. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:15, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. People do not get articles just for standing as candidates in future elections that haven't happened yet, so she's not notable on that basis, but this article is not doing nearly enough to properly establish her as an already-notable businesswoman. "Local" and "covering the entire state" are not mutually exclusive characteristics — even "statewide" coverage can still be too local to secure notability on "media coverage exists" grounds alone. What matters is the local vs. national significance of the thing you're claiming as her notability claim, and founding a company (especially a company for which we don't have have an article about the company) isn't an instant notability freebie in and of itself. And as for the sourcing, some of the footnotes aren't GNG-worthy coverage at all, while others are GNG-worthy but McInnis herself isn't the primary subject of them, and thus aren't helping to get her over GNG as an individual.
So the way forward here would be to write an article about the company which properly demonstrates that it would meet WP:CORP requirements, not a BLP of its founder — even if it's trying (but not succeeding) to prove preexisting notability in business, this is clearly an article that was intended as publicity for an election campaign. Bearcat (talk) 16:52, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Bearcat absolutely not intended as publicity. I contribute across Alabama election related articles and research candidates. I saw strong coverage of her, prior to her declaration of candidacy and created the page. I stated all my points why I think it passes GNG above, I am only responding to the point that this was "clearly intended" as publicity. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 17:22, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Amy Scherber

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

Owning a bakery of local interest does not seem a claim to notability strong enough to merit an encyclopedic article.

In addition, I'd argue that, if anything is notable here, is the bakery itself, and not the person. This seems a case of someone who is known for a single event: having founded a bakery.

"When an individual is significant for their role in a single event, it may be unclear whether an article should be written about the individual, the event or both. In considering whether to create separate articles, the degree of significance of the event itself and of the individual's role within it should both be considered. The general rule is to cover the event, not the person." WP:SINGLEEVENT

JohnMizuki (talk) 01:18, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, Women, Food and drink, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:32, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Aside from founding the bakery, which has received coverage in various media outlets including The NY Times, she has published books which themselves have received media coverage. She is clearly more notable than the bakery, which could perhaps have its own article if someone cares to make one. Thriley (talk) 01:35, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, she was nominated twice for the James Beard award for outstanding pastry chef. Clearly someone at the top of her field. Thriley (talk) 01:42, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Amy's Bread and rework as needed. As per nom this appears to primarily be a WP:BLP1E, as even the books are based on the notability of the resturant/bakery. Nothing outside of the bakery seem to indicate she has done anything significant or noteworhty. It does look like her company, has come to widespread acclaim, with multiple independent, reliable, secondary sources, providing significant coverage of either the bakery or Amy herself. However, as it stands right now, this is all established because of her success as a busiensswoman and the acclaim she has received because of the business. The only reliable, sigcov that I found in the news was an interview about her daily life and her gardening[1] but there was nothing notable about that and if she wasn't known for her bakery (as established in the article lead), there is no reason given for why write about this persons private life. The books themselves are not notable, and fail WP:BKCRIT and they don't even rank all that well, such as Amazon showing all three books under the category of Baking Bread as not even in the top 500. All that to say, the books seem rather non-notable, and they gain their significance only from the association with the bakery. TiggerJay (talk) 04:38, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment WP:BLP1E is not accurate here at all. She’s gotten coverage for over 30 years from being a business owner, an author, and promoter of baking. She’s won awards- there are more nominations and wins to mention. Clearly meets GNG. Thriley (talk) 05:05, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for adding the information about the award nominations. I wasn't aware of that. Notability is now demonstrated. JohnMizuki (talk) 21:14, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Passes criteria 1 of WP:ANYBIO as a multiple nominee of the James Beard Award.4meter4 (talk) 15:50, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Agree that it passes WP:BASIC per the existing sources and possibly WP:GNG. Encourage the nominator to please slow down and familiarize yourself more with deletion processess before inappropriately prodding and nominating so many articles for deletion. You may also want to gain more experience with editing in mainspace and in participating in other tasks. Happy editing. Cielquiparle (talk) 21:29, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I don't see what BLP1E or anything else wrong with this article. FWIW, several of my friends follow her on social media, and I've heard of her bakery. Bearian (talk) 13:25, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lindt Home of Chocolate

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

The shop does not have enough coverage in media to meet notability requirements. JohnMizuki ([[User talk:|talk]]) 19:31, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Museums and libraries, and Switzerland. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:58, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t understand the reasoning of the nominator. 1) It’s not a shop 2) The article is based on reliable independent sources. 95.98.65.177 (talk) 07:19, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The purpose of the "museum" is to promote one single brand, the same company that created it. It seems it's a museum only in name, and I can see in the museum photos that products are sold in situ. I would not consider it a cultural institution. In addition, all the press coverage that I found seems to be press releases. JohnMizuki (talk) 12:17, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think literally every museum has a shop. And that’s a museum is about it own brand is not a reason as it’s about coverage in sources. I don’t see evidence that the listed sources are press releases. 95.98.65.177 (talk) 19:19, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:BEFORE, which applies to non-BLPs. I easily found there is significant coverage of this subject in entire news and magazine articles in reliable sources. (Additional, tangential reasons: Wikipedia:It's a castle! comes closest to my thoughts on tourist attractions. On one hand, I think we need to be cautious about adding more policies in the near future, for reasons I don't want to discuss here. On the other hand, there's probably a consensus that a tourist attraction that gets at least 2,000 visitors a day might be worth inclusion.) Bearian (talk) 08:08, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: On a skim, I'm pretty sure that much of its coverage, particularly after its opening, looks paid/facilitated and should be examined through a WP:NCORP / WP:INDEPENDENT lens, specifically the DesignWanted article which is written by a freelancer (cf https://designwanted.com/submit-news/) and doesn't make any declarations (other than Lindt copyrights on the pictures). That said [2] indicates that it is a genuine attraction (tickets sold out today) so it's not just a thinly disguised excuse for a retail outlet, and deletion should never be the correct result (though merge/redirect to Lindt#Museum might be). ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 12:07, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I even see it’s sold out for the coming few weeks until 9 September, haha. 95.98.65.177 (talk) 19:19, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - there is decent coverage and that it be attached to a specific brand does not shock me (it is pretty common here). Superboilles (talk) 20:37, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Not unusual for companies to have museums about their own products or brands, and many of these are very popular tourist attractions. Certainly enough coverage of this to establish notability and there seems to be enough content to justify a separate article as well. Reywas92^Talk 22:58, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - notability satisfies any of nominators concerns. MayhemStoppingBy (talk) 23:09, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Emilio Baglioni

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

The article reads more like a promotional biography than an encyclopedic entry. Much of the content is unsourced, or sourced to highly unreliable or self-published material (e.g. personal websites, YouTube uploads from the subject, a dead local blog). There is little evidence of significant coverage in independent, reliable secondary sources that would establish notability under WP:BIO. The inclusion of unsourced claims about childhood experiences, family lineage, and personal relationships further contributes to the article’s promotional tone. eh bien mon prince (talk) 18:00, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Food and drink, and Italy. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:24, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Switzerland, England, California, Nevada, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:27, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Appears to be a chef of some local renown---his restaurant got a LA Times review back in the 1980s and received additional WP:MILL coverage of the restaurant's life cycle. (1 2)---but there is no significant coverage of the subject to substantiate WP:GNG. -- BriefEdits (talk) 15:36, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Totally promo article, no evidence of notability, clearly fails WP:GNG. Baqi:) (talk) 20:36, 25 August 2025 (UTC) Blocked sock. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:13, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Purge server cache

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Food and drink

Contents

Food and drink

Michael Booth (writer)

List of Minnesotan desserts

Christina Woerner McInnis

Amy Scherber

Lindt Home of Chocolate

Emilio Baglioni

Proposed deletions

Templates for Discussion