Draft talk:Foodporn

Better sources needed
I proposed this article for deletion last year and since then there are still no independent, reliable sources that discuss the topic in detail. I'm going to give it a while and then come back and submit the article to AfD. --Slashme (talk) 09:17, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Removal of screenshots
Thanks for your comments but I am a little confused by your deletion of my entry. You referred to Screenshots but under these guidelines, you are able to publish screenshots if "all content in them is under a free license or in the public domain." The screenshots I uploaded were from youtube which operates in the public domain. Further, viewers of youtube have a free license to consume content on youtube as specified under youtube's own terms and conditions. This free licence is perpetual unless revoked by youtube in their full discretion. Kindly clarify or undo your changes? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.209.34 (talk • contribs) 14:45, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 00:37, 18 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I think you are mistaken availability of media on Internet with copyrights status. Some videos on YouTube are placed under terms of Creative Commons licenses, but this is done explicitly. In future please discuss Commons matters there. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:00, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Redirect or article
Copuld we please have some discussion on whether this is to be an article or a redirect to Food porn, rather than just changing back and forth? Thank you.

pinging previous contributors DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 00:46, 18 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I looked through the sources in the article and don't see in-depth significant independent coverage in RS to survive AFD, so I would say this should be a redirect unless new sources are found (I haven't looked myself). MB 01:06, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

while I agree this article requires further independent references to make it stronger, the differences between "foodporn" and "food porn" are significant enough to warrant separate pages. Further, it is clear that user Hogohit (who made the redirect) is a vandalism account as according to Special:Contributions/Hogohit, this account was created 2 days ago and the only edits they have done is to delete foodporn and food porn references. I think Hogohit should be banned for vandalism and the page foodporn be reinstated (redirect removed) so the community can add further references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hazelsletterings (talk • contribs) 03:48, 18 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Hazelsletterings, please assume good faith. Hogohit is a new account, but I don't see evidence of vandalism. What I would suggest is that you find two or three reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article and that discuss the company or the app in detail and at length, and then reinstate the article using those references, with an edit summary something along the lines of "recreated article with evidence of notability". Then if it simply gets reverted to a redirect, you can ping us all again. --Slashme (talk) 04:40, 18 August 2020 (UTC)