Talk:Ado Campeol

Merge back into tiramisu?
I see nothing on this page that indicates that Ado Campeol is notable for anything besides his role in the invention of tiramisu; cf. WP:SINGLEEVENT. All four references are obituaries rehashing pretty much the same information, and shouldn't be counted as independent sources. (PS, 2 Nov 21: Actually the owner of the restaurant where tiramisu was supposedly invented, not even the inventor.)

Moreover, there is good evidence that he wasn't even the inventor of tiramisu in the first place; see it:Tiramisù.

The only information on this page that wasn't already mentioned on the tiramisu page is Campeol's birth and death dates, which I have now added there, making this page redundant.

I originally tagged this page with to see if there was any support for keeping it. Another editor removed the tag on procedural grounds (I didn't notify the main contributor). OK, fine, though the Template:Db-person only suggests "considering" notifying the main contributor. Perhaps it would have been more constructive to simply notify them rather than remove the notice?

I then tagged it with to engage other editors in discussion. This too was removed, on the grounds that "if the article should be a redirect, then redirect it, not delete it", which I don't quite understand, because a common outcome of a full AfD is "merge"; doesn't this apply, mutatis mutandis, to PROD?

So given the other editor's advice to redirect it, I did just that. Then that was reverted, on the grounds that "consensus should be sought". Well, I put up two different notices to encourage discussion! Also, that reversion claimed "there is more content that can be added as his death has been widely reported in reliable sources". Well, then, please add it! That's not what I've seen -- pretty much every article on him is a carbon copy with no original reporting. --Macrakis (talk) 22:39, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if there's a better way, but I suggest you nominate the article for deletion and in your nominating statement suggest that an alternative to deletion could be a redirect to Tiramisu.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:58, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Separating out tiramisu content
I edited this article to remove the content that belongs in the tiramisu article -- regardless of whether Ado Campeol remains as a separate article. Bbb23 reverted, with the comment "don't do that while the article is at AfD". I disagree. Padding the article with content that doesn't belong in it gives the misimpression that there is more to say about Ado Campeol than irrelevant trivia about his participation in a youth choir and a rugby club. --Macrakis (talk) 18:22, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

PS Remember, Campeol isn't even credited as the inventor of tiramisu. Just the owner of the restaurant where it was supposedly invented, but in fact was not. --Macrakis (talk) 18:24, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Did you know nomination
Surely you're joking: This is just silly. --Macrakis (talk) 15:02, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
 * The article is in the middle of an AfD.
 * The idea that a mistake in the kitchen created a new dish is a hoary piece of culinary folklore, repeated for many dishes.
 * In any case, the evidence is that tiramisu was not created in the kitchen of the restaurant that Campeol owned.


 * With due respect, I do not think it is 'silly'. I have no preference on which way the AfD goes. If the article stays, I would like to nominate it for a DYK -- I don't see anything wrong with that. Have a nice day. Ktin (talk) 15:55, 10 November 2021 (UTC)


 * It's silly because "mistake in the kitchen" is a trope, not history.
 * It's silly because Campeol, as far as I can tell, is only named "Father of Tiramisu" (or "Papà del Tiramisu") in obituaries -- so far, I haven't found any earlier evidence of that name. The one reference to the "father of tiramisu" that I've been able to find that dates from before October 2021 is this recipe (published 2012) calling not Campeol, but Roberto Linguanotto the "father of Tiramisu". On Linguanotto's own former web site (where he uses the spelling tiramesù), he claims to have invented it, but the phrase "father of tiramisu" doesn't appear, and there's nothing about an accident in the kitchen in his History section.
 * The obituaries aren't even independent sources. They are all pretty much copies of each other (though a couple have additional information), probably coming from a press release by the publicist for Campeol's restaurant.
 * I will include this information on Talk:Tiramisu. --Macrakis (talk) 18:23, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I see that there is some amount of WP:OR going on with your statements above, specifically the part about mistake in the kitchen being a trope and not history. Let me remind you that we go by WP:RS which currently in the case of BBC, FT, and CBS (to name a few) are saying that he was referred to as the 'father of tiramisu'. To the best of my knowledge, the WP:RS articles are not claiming that he 'invented' the tiramisu, nor is the wiki article saying so. Please keep your conversations at the AfD. Again, let me repeat, I have absolutely no preference on which way the AfD goes. Please do not call the actions of a fellow editor 'silly'. It is perfectly alright to disagree, but, calling it 'silly' is coming from a place of condescension even if that might not be intended (I am WP:AGF here). At the cost of repeating myself, I have absolutely no preference on which way this AfD goes. If the article survives, I would like to nominate it for a special occasion WP:DYK. If the article does not survive, the WP:DYKN is automatically failed. Good luck and I wish you well. Ktin (talk) 18:31, 10 November 2021 (UTC)


 * This is a talk page, not an article. I would not claim the "trope" part in the article itself without an RS, but it is reasonable in a discussion about the page.
 * The articles in the various newspapers do not appear to be independent sources. They appear to be slight variations on a wire story. Evaluating the quality of sources is not OR -- it is something we have to do as WP editors. Just because dozens of newspapers reprint the same human interest story does not mean that it is well attested.
 * I'm sorry if you were offended by the word "silly". It just seemed strange to propose this article for DYK when it's in the middle of an AfD.
 * I have added more sources to the article that show that the Christmas date is not reliable. Even the restaurant itself doesn't claim that date.
 * Have you been able to find sources for "father of tiramisu" before October 2021? I haven't, which makes me wonder what is going on here. --Macrakis (talk) 19:08, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
 * To be very clear, stepping into the second sentence -- I have never mentioned diligence with news sources as OR. I mentioned the first sentence specifically as OR. That said, I accept your apologies for the 'silly' utterance. That was definitely not well received from my side, as you can see because, I was the one who noted in my DYK that there is an AfD underway, and based on the result of the AfD the DYK can proceed. Ktin (talk) 00:03, 11 November 2021 (UTC)


 * You wanted a source for the "trope". Here's one:
 * It's your typical food yarn about the magic of culinary mistakes, the sort that is supposed to convey accidental genius.
 * Best, --Macrakis (talk) 20:27, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Definitely one view worth taking in as with the other views. Either ways, with your permission, I will step out of this conversation -- like I said, I have absolutely no preference in the way the AfD goes. Good luck and I continue to wish you the absolute best. Ktin (talk) 00:05, 11 November 2021 (UTC)


 * This is not "one view". Anyone who has followed food history will be aware of this sort of nonsense claim and of the unreliability of newspaper "human interest" articles on food history. The food historian Jim Chevallier, the author of A History of the Food of Paris said in a Facebook discussion "I saw this item on tiramisu and thought, 'Do I even want to bother?' Some claims just scream bogus." Unfortunately, that is on a Facebook page for food history which is not generally visible and so neither WP:RS nor WP:V. --Macrakis (talk) 14:39, 11 November 2021 (UTC)