Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Burger King menu items (second nomination)

Food and drink: Foodservice Project‑class

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles Project This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Related taskforces: /  This page is supported by the Foodservice task force. Food and Drink task list: edit history watch purge To edit this page, select here Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink: Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish Participate in project-related deletion discussions. Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this. Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here. Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

So far none of the people who have advocated for delete have tried to qualify their statements. As others before me have stated and as per the instructions for making an argument on a AfD nomination, just linking to a policy page does not qualify as an acceptable argument. To make a qualified argument you must give a reason as to what on those policy pages applies to keeping/deleting an article. Please take the time to actually read the article, view the sources and see if they are reliable, and finally confirm that is or isn't original research. Point out these flaws otherwise you have not made an acceptable point as to why the article should be kept or deleted.

- Jeremy (Jerem43 00:53, 22 September 2007 (UTC))[reply]

• Comment. I wanted to note that this AfD grew out of this AN discussion . My part in it was merging the page histories of 3 articles. My research found, as shown by this diff that the vast majority of the old, deleted article is currently incorporated in the current article (that's not to say that the new article hasn't been expanded to include a lot more than the previous). I have been unable to verify Jerem's claims that this "new" article was created due to the Burger King article becoming too large. (note: that argument does apply to the "old" previously deleted article) I have asked for diff to prove this claim, but they have yet to be provided. My own personal research shows that the Burger King "products" section basically remained unchanged during the 2 months between when the last article was deleted and when the new one created. Also if you compare the diffs from the very first edit to the article (Nov 30), to the last day (Feb 3rd) the previous article existed, you can note that the article just isn't incorporating text from the same source that was used to create the first article (i.e. the old "products" section of BK that was spun out in late 2006), but instead is using the deleted content. (which is why I restored the page history of the deleted article, and merged the histories). This comment is in response to Jerem's note at the top. While none of this may have significant baring on the AfD discussion, I just felt the record needed to be corrected if Jerem is going to place inaccurate notices at the top of the AfD.-Andrew c ^[talk] 14:14, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Response - I am sorry that I did not respond on the WP:AN board sooner as I was at work and could not take the time to do so. Please take a look at it as I did make some errors in creating the article. If there is any inaccuracies in my note at the top please correct them as I do want to mislead the contributers on this page, I just wanted to let people know about the history of the article that is being discussed. - Jeremy (Jerem43 15:58, 21 September 2007 (UTC))[reply]
• Note: these comments were moved from the AfD discussion-Andrew c ^[talk] 16:24, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for clearing this up. I hope you don't mind that I moved the comments out of the main AfD discussion. And per your invitation, I made a couple clarifying adjustments to your note. I think the issue is that, while originally created in the BK article, the bulk of the content was moved out into its own article which was then deleted. Properly, the restore that content would have taken a deletion review. I understand now that you used your personal files, which originated from the late 2006 version of the BK article. I believe the page history issue is cleared up (besides the very first edit lacking a note that the content was spun out from another article). If this article survives AfD, I'd be glad to move the article back to the most recent title if no one opposes. Like I said before, it was just easier to merge the page histories by moving everything back to the original title. Thanks for explaining things.-Andrew c ^[talk] 16:34, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am using part of the modified note on the Talk:Burger King products page to inform others about the differences between the to AfD discussions. - Jeremy (Jerem43 19:51, 14 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]