Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coffee consumption in Uruguay

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. Joyous! | Talk 01:05, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Coffee consumption in Uruguay

Coffee consumption in Uruguay (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Edit history

• The article was first written with the name "Coffee production in Uruguay", about the fact that there is no coffee production in that country.
• Someone then came along and moved the page to its current name.
• Besides tags, fixes, templates etc., there has been only one content edit.

Reasons for deletion

• The informantion no WP:SIGNIFICANCE
• The article is an orphan, barring one page where it apppears mentioned only under "See also".
• Could unleash a wave of article creation on vertical and horizontal directions: "Coffe consumption in Poland", "Coffe consumption in Bolivia", "Coffe consumption in Tanzania", "Coffe consumption in Malasya", "Coffe consumption in Macau", "Coffe consumption in London", and "Tea consumption in Uruguay", "Wine consumption in Uruguay", "Beer consumption in Uruguay", "Butter consumption in Uruguay", "Maize consumption in Uruguay", "Fish consumption in Uruguay". Such articles, would be a magnet for IPs living in those places adding the ususal anecdotal, unsourced, hearsay, popular wisdom type of content that is a headache for more serious editors. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 11:13, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I feel rather conflicted on this. On the one hand it does seem rather parochial to be talking about the trade in food commodities in individual countries. I'm doubting that coffee is even a particularly large part of the Ugandan econony. On the other hand, it is undoubtedly true that there is a level of cultural bias going on. We have pages on Coffee in Seattle, why shouldn't we also have pages on consumption in African countries? We have pages on Tea in the United Kingdom, why shouldn't there be an equivalent about coffee culture in Uganda? I don't know how to process this, but simply saying it is "popular wisdom type of content" doesn't seem to cut through the bias which says the beverage culture in the United Kingdom or Seattle is important but the equivalent in Uganda isn't. JMWt (talk) 11:49, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Reply to above comment: Yes, you are absolutely right that we have similar articles and I had meant to make a note on that, but forgot to do so as I typed up my thought. However, it is a question of scale and propotionality, as you correctly pointed out "I'm doubting that coffee is even a particularly large part of the Ugandan econony". But it is not about cultural bias, more a question of how significant something is a specific country — no-one would bat an eyelid seeing an article on "Manga in Japan" or "Anime in Japan" or "Bacalhau in Portugal", "Charcuterie in France". Likewise, I would be happy to see an article on "Protest music in Uruguay", or "Barbecue (Asado) in Uruguay" or "Consumption of yerba mate in Uruguay". However I would do a double-take if I saw an article on "Rugby in Mali", or "Bocce in London" or "Consumption of arak in Belgium". Thanks for your input. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 12:31, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:07, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Uruguay-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:07, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete the mere consumption of coffee on a by-country basis has no encyclopedic value from what I can see. (Actually, I see WP:NOTSTATSBOOK does not cover this, as the info here is properly presented -- but it's still unencyclopedic imo. Wikipedia is a gazetteer of certain things, such as all species or named places, but the logical extension of this for a multitude of "Fooian food consumption in Fooian country" articles is clearly not a good idea). Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:18, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Consumption of a drink is unlikely to be notable unless it has a significant social impact. For instance, English coffeehouses in the 17th and 18th centuries is an article with encyclopedic value and a similar scope. Ceosad (talk) 22:10, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:BULLOCKS. The citations are 90 years out of date!!! Coffee is not drunk as much today in Uruguay as is mate for breakfast, beer for lunch, and wine for dinner. I've been there, and by the way, their beer is excellent. ;-) Bearian (talk) 00:36, 1 December 2016 (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.