User talk:Andrew Davidson/food and drink

A pint
Who knows, maybe I'll take you up someday on that pint you offered me a few years back or so when in London, maybe more. As Rob Halford said, some folks are a ten pint a nighter. Rocka Rolla, North America1000 17:56, 2 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks. When I received that, I was actually having a lighter Portuguese beer (right), which is more to my taste.  Cheers! Andrew D. (talk) 22:47, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

A warrior's drink
juice. North America1000 19:48, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why you are honouring me with this news but I do like a few prunes for breakfast with my muesli or porridge. It is good to find another with similar tastes... Andrew D. (talk) 21:10, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Trying to get others to hopefully collaborate. As usual, it's been slow going. Worf told me to thank you for your addition to the article! North America1000 21:37, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

juice. North America1000 02:50, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

juice, created by North America1000 22:32, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Beer in Tasmania
Beer in tas merge is crap - however the beer in oz article (to merge to) is as well. have no fear something will return to bite the bums of those who havent a clue - afds can be very much be made by fly by opportunists JarrahTree 02:18, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * No worries, mate. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:29, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Blossom's Inn
Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Bocca di Lupo, Sanguinaccio dolce, Buckwheat honey
Nice design at User:Andrew Davidson/Whimsy. I have added it to my user page (with proper attribution, and also credit to you) in my dashboard section. Neat idea! North America1000 20:34, 1 September 2016 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. As our main editor of food and drink topics, you may also be interested in some other recent work:
 * Bocca di Lupo and The Glad, articles which I worked on for recent London editathon/wikimeets and which are currently up at DYK
 * Sanguinaccio dolce – an interesting regional dish served at Bocca di Lupo which I've just started as a separate article
 * Buckwheat honey – another new topic which has generated some discussion.
 * Bon appétit! Andrew D. (talk) 10:15, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the links. I don't know about being a "main editor", but sure, I've made some contributions in this area that I like. Lots of others create new articles too. Check out WP:NEWFOOD, for example! North America1000 10:38, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Sanguinaccio dolce looks a bit like poop (ha ha), but sounds delicious. See also Ttongppang. North America1000 23:46, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Good point. There's lots of potential DYK material there.  There are people out there who make long lists of such food... Andrew D. (talk) 08:00, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Carla Capalbo
I have reverted your change. You are not an AFC reviewer and should have submitted it to AFC if it was keepworthy. It has some unsourced claims (that she wrote for BBC Olive, The Independent, World of Fine Wine, Bon Appétit, Departures, Food & Wine and Decanter) and should be in draftspace until accepted. I've submitted it to AFC and there you will see if it is acceptable. I won't accept it. -- » Shadowowl  &#124;  talk  18:37, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Shadowowl does not seem to understand the process. Per WP:DRAFTIFY, "A reviewer unilaterally draftifying is appropriate if all of the following are true:
 * (1) The topic has some potential merit
 * (2) Is not good enough
 * (3) And there is no evidence of active improvement"
 * Condition 3 was not met because I improved the page after saving it from G13. I expect to be doing more at an editathon on Wednesday at the British Library, which will be attended by other veteran editors and professional food writers like the subject.  Shadowowl should therefore please revert their disruption. Andrew D. (talk) 19:08, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * The fact that you are calling me a disruptor (so ironic) says enough to me that I shouldn't restore your article. It was a draft, and is not accepted by a reviewer. The policy cited is not usable. It is not a draftify.-- &raquo; Shadowowl  &#124;  talk  19:21, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * shadowowl draftified the page by moving it from main space, where I had placed it. They did so after trying to delete the page by G13.  They don't seem to understand that draft space does not belong to AfC or that they are dealing with more experienced editors.  MassiveEartha, who first created the draft, has been editing since 2012 and is now a trainer.  I myself have been editing even longer and have autopatrolled rights because I have created hundreds of valid articles.  AfC is only for inexperienced editors who are unable to create pages in mainspace.  Shadowowl should please revert and get out of the way. Andrew D. (talk) 19:42, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Getting angry doesn't help. It is a draft and this is circumventing the AFC process. AFC is not only for inexperienced editors. I am not going to revert myself. Patiently wait till someone accepts/declines the draft. And it is still not a draftify, it is a revert of a move. -- &raquo; Shadowowl  &#124;  talk  19:48, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Wait patiently for two months so that you can G13 it again? I don't think so.  There will be plenty of other experienced editors at the editathon and I shall consult with them if the matter is not resolved sooner.  Andrew D. (talk) 20:02, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I have to say I agree with Andrew here, (although he could have been more polite about making the point, as presumably your edits were made in good faith). There is no requirement for an experienced editor to take anything through AFC, and in this case there doesn't appear to be anything wrong with the draft other than its short length, meaning Andrew was within his rights to move it to article space and mark it as a stub so that it can be improved by himself or others. I'm not sure how your insistence on putting it back to draft space and waiting two months for someone to review it benefits anyone. Thanks. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 20:16, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * See below. It was declined, and for good reason.--Shadowowl on mobile (talk) 21:02, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * It was declined, for what would have been good reasons if the draft had actually come through the AfC process. In this case, it wasn't, and I more or less agree with Amakuru. --joe deckertalk 20:24, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * the point is that you draftified an article that you had no business drafifying. If you think it doesn't assert significance then put an A7 tag on it and let an admin decide. Your action was to unilaterally delete an article created by an experienced editor, and then send it to AFC, with no due process followed. If Andrew had created that article from scratch directly into mainspace then we wouldn't be having this discussion so I'm not sure what's different about this. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 21:44, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * It was originally a draft, and I dont think nominating it for G13 makes it a article good enough to skip afc process. -- &raquo;  Shadowowl  &#124;  talk  11:57, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Joe Decker was:

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Carla Capalbo (2) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Carla Capalbo (2), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "db-self" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Carla_Capalbo_(2) Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Joe_Decker&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Carla_Capalbo_(2) reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

joe deckertalk 20:29, 21 May 2018 (UTC)


 * I did not submit the page in question to AfC. So why has this enormous template been placed here?  Please see WP:DTTR.  Note also a recent article creation by User:Joe Decker  – Giuseppe Momo.  That is a perfunctory stub which seems inferior to the page in question.  So we see that the AfC process is dysfunctional.  Let's have the page in question placed into mainspace.  If people think it is so bad then they can take it to AfD -- a process based upon consensus rather than the arbitrary opinion of a single editor. Andrew D. (talk) 21:14, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Template was left there by automation, which apparently failed to correctly detect that Shadowowl submitted it instead of you. Chill out, and take your complaint on this to the maintainers of the AfC scripts. All the best, --joe deckertalk 20:19, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Also, your comparison to Momo is silly. The stub on Momo has an assertion of significance and multiple (2), independent, reliable, sources which discuss him in detail. Your article on Capaldo did not reach the latter bar.  Trying to say that that's about article length or writing quality misses the point entirely. Sadly that was lost in the fact that you should have never been put in that queue in the first place, and I am sympathetic to your irritation. --joe deckertalk 20:28, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Cheese and wine
Hi. Thanks for deprodding Wine lake: I was about to do the same. However, I was puzzled by your edit summary, which was just saying that you were removing the prod tag "per WP:DEPROD". At least some hint of an explanation is usually expected here, otherwise the edit summary leaves the impression that you're not concerned about the article's notability, but are deprodding it simply because you can. Also – per WP:DEPROD :) – it's a good idea to notify the proposer: that's just basic courtesy, and it allows them to see your argument for keeping, and if they still disagree, paves the way for them to start an AfD. – Uanfala (talk) 20:45, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * WP:REVTALK advises "Avoid using edit summaries to carry on debates or negotiation over the content or to express opinions of the other users involved. This creates an atmosphere where the only way to carry on discussion is to revert other editors!" So, in my edit summary, I focus upon describing the change made to the article and support this with a link to the relevant process description.  Andrew🐉(talk) 22:14, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Ah, REVTALK. Did you mean to post on the talk page then? You don't seem to have done that. – Uanfala (talk) 22:27, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I see you've just posted now. That's good, thanks! – Uanfala (talk) 22:30, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Some details on the editors involved, for the record
 * BarrelProof specialises in whisky and seems to know nothing about the topic in question
 * The editor who started the page was David Justin. According to the SPI, this was David J. Hanson – a professor and expert on wine.
 * The expert professor was blocked by Rlevse – a former admin who, as it happens, was disgraced when I reported plagiarism in an FA that they had written
 * So, in summary, valid content started by an expert was proposed for "uncontroversial deletion" by someone who is less expert. As a prod patroller, my main concern is that our content be protected.  It is good that Uanfala is doing this too. Andrew🐉(talk) 23:47, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I just saw that you removed the PROD I put on the Gevrik page, but you didn't leave an explanation anywhere (as far as I can tell). Did you have a specific reason for keeping the page? If not, I'll just put it up for AFD, but I'd be eager to hear counterpoints to deleting it. — HTGS (talk) 22:18, 1 May 2021 (UTC)


 * The prod process is only for uncontroversial deletion and should not be used if opposition is expected. HTGS should please expect opposition in all such cases. Andrew🐉(talk) 22:29, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I think you misunderstand me. I did see these PRODs as uncontroversial, but following your contest I am happy to discuss the deletion and reconsider. I am not opposed to discussing these topics, or even leaving them undeleted, but you have made no effort to explain why you think these pages are notable or should even be controversial to delete. At this point you appear to be acting in bad faith, but I do hope you have a better explanation. — HTGS (talk) 22:34, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Or maybe you're just opposed to PROD as a system in toto? If that's the case, I disagree, but understand. To be clear, I have no quarrel with you, I just want to understand your actions. — HTGS (talk) 22:38, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi, just a heads up that I am AFDing Tesyn, another cheese you DEPRODed. — HTGS (talk) 02:53, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Claire Ptak
– Ianblair23 (talk) 01:01, 7 July 2018 (UTC)


 * 2035 views. Andrew D. (talk) 07:13, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:21, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Violet Bakery Cookbook.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 04:07, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Dog & Bull


The article Dog & Bull has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Fails WP:NBUILDING and WP:GNG, purely WP:MILL"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mztourist (talk) 04:51, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dog & Bull is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Dog & Bull until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mztourist (talk) 09:49, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi. I've been having fun adding little bits to the above article - I hope that's OK. Please feel free to change or remove any of my additions, if you like. I would have liked to have found more about the Bell inn but could not. There must be more out there, somewhere, but I'm running out of ideas about where to look. There is certainly more in the C19 newspapers about the inquest on the child. Let me know if you want me to add any of that (leaving out any horrific bits, of course) Victorian journalists were very compassionate, usually, so it should be possible to add the info tastefully. Storye book (talk) 17:04, 5 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I'll be keeping an eye on the article as it goes through the DYK process and have some more bits to add as its long history fleshes out. Your additions from the newspaper archive were good.  I looked at some other newspaper archives but didn't find much so it's interesting that they differ. Andrew🐉(talk) 19:03, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I look forward to seeing what new information appears. I have discovered from old newspaper reports that Butcher's Row was not the whole street (or at least not the whole of Surrey Street as it is today), but a row of very old jetted-storey buildings which was near, but didn't include, the Dog & Bull. That row was originally called the Shambles. The row burned down on 9 October 1910, and on 7 January 1911 it was reported that the footings or part-walls of the old Market building were discovered inside or underneath - not sure which because the microfilmed image is too dark to see. I would have liked to have added that to the article, but I don't suppose it belongs there. The Victoria County History mentions, if I remember rightly, that the Market building was erected in Tudor times. Storye book (talk) 20:02, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * And another thing ... The premises damaged by fire were: no.38 Surrey St fried fish shop, no.35 butcher's shop, 37 hardware stores, 39 shop, 40 cinemategraph hall, un-numbered empty storeroom for 39 and 41, 41 wardrobe dealer, 42, butcher's shop. I have copied this in the same number order as in the newspaper - the ordering is odd, but there it is. Storye book (talk) 20:13, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * The area seems quite rich in history but it's on the other side of London from me. I've never been there and tend to avoid going south of river as it's out of my comfort zone.  Anyway, all that good stuff can go in the Surrey Street Market article.  Note that a shambles is another name for a place of slaughter and so fits with the Butcher's Row name.  This sort of topic is like a jigsaw puzzle -- fitting all the pieces is good fun, eh? Andrew🐉(talk) 20:46, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Ha, yes, fun, but I'm even further away - Yorkshire. But if the lockdown eases up over summer, I may be able to ask a West Sussex friend to pop over and photograph the windows from the inside, if someone hasn't done that already. Fingers crossed for that. I didn't realise that shambles meant slaughter - yes that does make sense.Storye book (talk) 20:58, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Oops, sorry, I should have explained. See File:Dog and Bull pub, Croydon.jpg. The journalist got the date wrong. If you disagree about that, then I'll get the commons image deleted. Storye book (talk) 12:00, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what journalist you mean. I found the image on Flickr which states quite plausibly that the photo was taken in 1987 and so it's not PD.  CAMRA's The Drinker says that the major renovation which had the place merged with A.E.Pearce took place in the early 90's and so it fits that timeline.  There seem to be lots of postcards of Surrey Street out there so maybe we can find something older.  For the Greene Man, I was able to find several old paintings but that place was more picturesque and artists drank there!
 * This discussion would be best recorded on the article's talk page now that it is reasonably safe from deletion. I'll copy it there.
 * Andrew🐉(talk) 12:26, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I have tagged the Commons image for deletion, and replied on the article talk page. Storye book (talk) 13:00, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Today is not 1 April: confusing hooks are not appropriate. Furthermore, you misapply WP:PREFER — it's talking about pages that have been protected because of content disputes, not pages that have been protected to prevent vandalism. Nyttend (talk) 13:01, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Nyttend's comment relates to this discussion at WP:ERRORS, where the issue was resolved. Andrew🐉(talk) 18:54, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

The article got 5,812 views on the day – good enough for an entry at WP:DYKSTATS. Thanks to all those who helped. Andrew🐉(talk) 18:54, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Andrew -- I had to pull Dog & Bull from the February DYK stats. Because it appeared in a 24-hour queue, the minimum for inclusion is 10,000 views. Cbl62 (talk) 19:16, 15 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I stand corrected. As they might say down at the old Dog & Bull, "Gertcha"! Andrew🐉(talk) 19:34, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Gaby's Deli
— Maile (talk) 23:05, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Georgetown Bagelry
Well ... no doubt you've found out-of-area substantive coverage in reliable sources that satisfy WP:AUD. What are they, please?   Ravenswing     11:50, 24 July 2020 (UTC)


 * I mainly recalled being taken to a bagel shop in Brick Lane by Edward after an all-night editathon. That is reasonably notable and so I supposed that this other place is too. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:04, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Permit me a moment to push my jaw back into place. You're seriously saying that you deprodded an article because you went to some other bagel shop and you think that bagel shops are presumptively notable???   Ravenswing      17:20, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Ravenswing's user page says that "This user is currently experiencing significant stress that may affect his ability to work on Wikipedia. This user may choose to work in quieter areas and avoid complicated tasks or areas prone to conflict." Proposing lots of articles for deletion does not seem to fit this prescription. Andrew🐉(talk) 22:47, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Greene Man
--valereee (talk) 00:01, 1 December 2019 (UTC)


 * 8,403 hits. Andrew D. (talk) 10:10, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

I see you removed the convert template on the page for the Green man pub. Why? This is contrary to Wikipedia's Manual of Style. Avi8tor (talk) 07:28, 3 December 2019 (UTC)


 * The addition of a parenthetic conversion was excessive and unnecessary detail contrary to WP:TERSE. Providing a link is a more compact way of providing information for anyone who is unsure what an acre is.  The hectare is not an SI unit nor is it customary in the UK and so using it in addition to the acre would tend to provoke confusion rather than assisting the reader.  The exact dimensions of the farm are unimportant in this context as it is a digression from the main topic of the Farthing Pie House.  It would be more relevant to convert the farthing into the cent but we're not doing that either. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:01, 3 December 2019 (UTC)


 * I think you miss the point that a vast number of English speakers (the former colonies) have no idea what an acre is and require an SI unit as per the Wiki MOS. It appears you are inserting a personal preference for units you are familiar with but that other readers are not familiar with. Reading an article in Wikipedia should not require you to get out a calculator. This is why we have the convert template, it keeps everyone happy. Avi8tor (talk) 08:25, 6 December 2019 (UTC)


 * The hectare is not an SI unit. If a conversion into SI units seemed appropriate then the area would be best expressed as about half a square kilometre.  But a conversion is not appropriate as it would be excessive clutter and detail in this context.  As the topic is mostly historical, there are numerous references to unfamiliar people, places and concepts.  Where a reader might want to know more about these, links are provided.  Parenthetic elaborations are not then needed. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:00, 6 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Sorry but I believe you are incorrect, see hectare, which states "Hectare is an SI accepted metric system unit of area equal to a square with 100-metre sides, or 10,000 m2". Further Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Units_of_measurement states "The main unit in which a quantity is expressed should generally be an SI unit or non-SI unit officially accepted for use with the SI". I think you are putting your personal preferences ahead of all other readers of Wikipedia articles, these is nothing excessive or cluttered about having SI included, all articles in English generally have both. I personally have never used acres or feet, so I'd have to look up some conversion to understand the size. I think you need to follow the MOS here and include either hectares or m2 in this particular article. I've been to the UK a number of times and the people I speak with generally use SI with the exception of miles and pints of beer. Australia also uses pints, but the word refers to a 500 ml glass of beer. The USA uses pints but it's a different size unit! Avi8tor (talk) 17:14, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Hockney
Can you use this reference: david-hockney-print-fish-and-chip-shop-bradford :) --ClemRutter (talk) 16:52, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll see what I can do with it. Andrew D. (talk) 17:15, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Honey garlic sauce
Re this: technically, you violated Per WP:CONTESTED by you really should not be simply reverting the PROD and not without Explain[ing] why you disagree with the proposed deletion, either in the edit summary or on the talk page. Even the message you left on the proposer's talk page after your second revert didn't give a reason for opposing the proposed deletion. So while it is technically out of line for User:Madmoons to re-add a PROD template that has been removed, that rule assumes that the template was removed in good faith, in accordance with the guidelines. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 08:02, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
 * actually, WP:CONTESTED covers both the points you mention, and you're seemingly incorrect on both. The wording says "You are strongly encouraged, but not required, to [...] explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion" and "If anyone, including the creator, removes a proposed deletion tag from a page, do not replace it, even if the tag was apparently removed in bad faith." So although it might have been nice for Andrew to have given some reasoning, the reinstatement of the prod was wrong, and the next avenue for this is AfD, not prod. Thanks &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 13:14, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Whoops! I see that now. Sorry about the mixup. I've not encountered either PROD or CONTESTED used all that much in the past; a couple of NOTHERE trolls PRODded some articles I wrote back in 2012/2013, and then in 2015-ish someone opened an ANI thread where an article's creator (a promotional SPA) had contested a PROD then opposed the subsequent AFD, and after a week the AFD was non-admin-closed as "no consensus", and I suggested the page be deleted because the article's creator had not provided a valid rationale and the closer had just been counting votes.
 * To be fair, though, Andrew has a history of opposing AFDs with ILIKEIT-type rationales, and even repeatedly violating WP:ARS's requirement that a rationale for keeping the article be included in an AFD's listing on that board,http:// and so probably shouldn't be reverting PRODs without giving any rationale. I'm neutral on whether the page in question should be deleted, mind you, so I'd rather have this be the last that is said on the matter lest I be seen as arguing for the deletion of an article whose deletion I might actually oppose.
 * Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 22:09, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

So ... do you ever provide rationales when removing deletion tags? Even if it is technically not a violation of policy, it comes across as deliberately disruptive, especially when your actual comments in AFDs often consist of bizarre counter-policy arguments, leaving other editors to assume you would give such counter-policy rationales if you gave any at all. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 03:08, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I have long been considering asking for a topic ban against editors who attempt to prevent deletion without a valid policy rationale. I think there's an argument to be made that repeated ILIKEIT behavior is disruptive, and the editors involved simply need to be kept away from deletion processes. I'm still working out the idea. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 15:20, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Intuitive eating
About this, please give reasons in edit notes, especially if you are doing something that is going to end up absorbing a bunch of other people's time. Jytdog (talk) 00:56, 18 May 2018 (UTC)


 * No, per WP:REVTALK, we should "Avoid using edit summaries to carry on debates or negotiation over the content ... This creates an atmosphere where the only way to carry on discussion is to revert other editors!" Reasoning and debate belong in discussion pages such as the  AfD which has been started for this matter.  I have commented in detail there.  Such comments also do not belong in edit summaries because the edit summaries cannot be edited to correct complex markup such as as links and templates.  Edit summaries should be succinct and there was significant pushback when their maximum size was increased because people don't want walls of text in their watchlist. Andrew D. (talk) 01:06, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

List of pubs in London
A topic that I suspect may be of interest to you. Feel free to help expand this new article if you're interested. Some entries would benefit from descriptions, such as those housed in buildings that are Grade II listed. Cheers, North America1000 05:41, 5 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes, it has crossed my mind to create something like this but I never got around to it. I'll help expand it but Edwardx is the the one we really need to get involved as he has created many of the individual articles. Andrew D. (talk) 06:18, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply, for pinging a potentially interested user, and for your additions to the article. North America1000 06:38, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

List of pubs in the United Kingdom
Why have you reverted my page move? Clearly the page is not a 'List of pubs in the United Kingdom' and attempting to fulfil that description would result in a very large, not to mention extremely boring, article. The page IS a list of 'notable' UK pubs, so I don't understand your motivation.Obscurasky (talk) 16:04, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
 * There was no consensus for the move.
 * The new title "List notable of pubs in the United Kingdom" was garbled and ungrammatical.
 * Per WP:LISTNAME, "Best practice is usually to avoid words like notable, famous, noted, prominent, etc. in the title of a list article."
 * Andrew D. (talk) 16:15, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
 * And the 'better practice' being what - inaccurately titled articles? Obscurasky (talk) 16:36, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Old Slaughter's Coffee House
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Oxford Food Symposium
Hi Andrew- thanks for taking part on Friday. You mentioned that you took a photo of the event and put it somewhere on social media. Can you point me to it? Thanks, MartinPoulter (talk) 17:07, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I've uploaded the image (right). The tweet contains the hashtag so you can find what others have done too. Thanks for helping to organise the event; it was a good one. Andrew D. (talk) 17:28, 8 July 2017 (UTC)  ‎
 * Awesome! Thanks, MartinPoulter (talk) 23:10, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

2018
Sup Andrew-D. Any reason this hasn't yet got an on-Wiki page? Take care! —SerialNumber54129 paranoia / cheap shit room 13:03, 15 May 2018 (UTC)


 * The page for this series of events is GLAM/Oxford Food Symposium. The on-wiki page tends to lag behind the coverage on the sites of the sponsoring organisations, as the focus is on drawing in attendance from their communities rather than ours. Andrew D. (talk) 13:21, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Great stuff, many thanks. I really ought to sign up for the BL event then. Cheers! —SerialNumber54129  paranoia / cheap shit room 13:41, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Better move fast as there aren't many spots left and it's also being plugged in other places such as the Symposium site. Andrew D. (talk) 13:49, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Would it be preferred to leave the space for a woman? —SerialNumber54129  paranoia / cheap shit room 13:53, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
 * The Symposium last year was quite a mixed bunch from foodies to farmers like James Rebanks. The BL events have had more women but seem reasonably open to the public.  Being a mid-week event will tend to limit attendance and my impression is that they are trying to fill up the last few places now.  It's good to have a leavening of veterans like us as newbies need a lot of hand-holding and we're also effective at getting pages written.  The BL is a good place to hang out and get wiki-work done so it's good to support events there.  And it would be interesting to meet you. Andrew D. (talk) 14:33, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Is that "Interesting" in the Chinese fashion ;) Indeed it would, AD. I'give them a bell.  —SerialNumber54129  paranoia / cheap shit room 15:50, 15 May 2018 (UTC)



Lily Bollinger
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:42, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Table beer
I've expanded this a bit and it's good to go for DYK, except I could do with another source to bolster some of the more obvious "hooky" stuff, such as "... that table beer was socially acceptable in the 18th century as you could drink several glasses without getting intoxicated?" Have you got anything? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  18:46, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I started the article after enjoying some Fuller's Table Beer at the Union Tavern in Maida Vale recently. There seems to be coverage of the modern type, which seems to be enjoying a revival -- see Bon Appetit, for example.  The history I've found mostly seems to focus on the fine detail of excise rates but I'll keep browsing for more.  But I've some other DYKs to catch up on first like Naomi Parker Fraley, which is up right now.  More anon. Andrew D. (talk) 19:04, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * There's that little place in SPIT that seems to delight in the stuff, no? V. handy for the way home, and the punters think you're just drinking cream soda :)   —SerialNumber54129  paranoia / cheap shit room 19:16, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * "No beer and no Wikipedia make Ritchie333 something something" ... "Go crazy?" "Don't mind if I do! Muahahahah!" Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  19:29, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Absolutely *hic* bad for the eye sight though ;)   —SerialNumber54129  paranoia / cheap shit room 19:32, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, but after looking at sources, I think this is a duplicate of small beer so I've merged the two together. Still, we have improved Wikipedia's coverage of this topic, so all is not lost. Ritchie333 (talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  21:17, 25 March 2018 (UTC)


 * I was well aware of the small beer page when I started this one. That's why I took some care to clarify table beer as a distinct class of beer, which was specified in law.  It was a medium grade and, as we have numerous other gradations and varieties of ale and beer, it seemed reasonable to detail this one.  That still seems sensible, but I still have other priorities and will return to this in due course, to see what has become of it. Andrew D. (talk) 21:24, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

The Black Swan, Oldstead
— Maile (talk) 00:04, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

The Cock


Despite a rather considerable difference of opinion on a different matter, I noted that this did in fact have a source citation in one of the articles it appeared in and so I updated the relevant field accordingly. I am hopeful you would approve.

I've also tagged for this for "duplication" to Commons, as artworks of historical locations are useful on other projects. The local copy will of course be retained as you'd explicitly marked this media file as keep local. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:31, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I also based on the citation had a look on archive.org and found: https://archive.org/details/brightonroadclas00harpiala/page/156, so will further update. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:35, 3 November 2018 (UTC)


 * note: uploaded as The Cock.jpg then moved to The Cock Hotel (Rowlandson).jpg then moved to The Cock (Rowlandson).jpg. See also The Cock sign. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:47, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

The Gladstone Arms
Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Tirril Brewery


The article Tirril Brewery has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing General notability guideline and the more detailed Notability (companies) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant English-language coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of 'This article meets criteria A and B because...' and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 13:55, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Tom's Ice Cream Bowl


A tag has been placed on File:Tom's Ice Cream Bowl.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a file licensed as "for non-commercial use only", "no derivative use", "for Wikipedia use only", or "used with permission"; and it has not been shown to comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. If you agree with the deletion, there is no need to do anything. If, however, you believe that this image may be retained on Wikipedia under one of the permitted conditions then:
 * state clearly the source of the image. If it has been copied from elsewhere on the web you should provide links to: the image itself, the page which uses it and the page which contains the license conditions.
 * add the relevant copyright tag and if necessary, a complete fair use rationale.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. <span style="background:-webkit-radial-gradient(red,blue);-webkit-background-clip:text;-webkit-text-fill-color:transparent;">Dylsss(talk contribs) 19:17, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

note: The picture in question is on Flickr with a Attribution-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic (CC BY-ND 2.0) licence. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:09, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Water roux
Andrew, could you please be more careful? Virtually everything in your new water roux article needed to be tagged. It would probably be best if you didn't leave "1st draft stub"s in the mainspace. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 10:39, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
 * FWIW, I finally got around to reading your response to my repeating the above at ANI, in which you basically ignored it again. Can I assume you are happy to create more work for your fellow Wikipedians by leaving unfinished (as in, of such a quality that it would/should fail if submitted at AFC; obviously nothing on Wikipedia is "finished") drafts in the mainspace? Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 01:45, 9 November 2018 (UTC)