Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A&W Canada Restaurant Structure


 * 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 of the debate was delete. Johnleemk | Talk 07:44, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

A&W Canada Restaurant Structure
Delete or Shorten and Merge with A&W_Restaurants. This page meets criteria for deletion because Wikipedia is not an instruction manual (Wikipedia: What Wikipedia is Not). In a shortened form with less detail, it could be a valid part of the A&W_Restaurants article, giving insight into how they operate; in it's current form, it's essentially a walkthrough for new A&W employees, and doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. WalterBranflakes 08:22, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment smells like a copyvio from an internal manual, too. Segv11 (talk/contribs) 10:10, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, anything with a list of cook times probably was not supposed to be made public. However, Walter, you could add original text to A&W Restaurants based on the info in this article. Gazpacho 12:46, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. This looks like it might have been copied out of a manual, which makes it copyvio. It also violates the Instruction Manual criteria, too. I agree with Gazpacho there might be some information that can be folded into the main article, but as its own article it gives me the same indigestion their burgers do. 23skidoo 15:36, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Starts off "like other restaurant chains". Quite.  There is nothign apparently unique abut this. Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] [[Image:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg|25px|  ]] AfD? 00:09, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: see also Articles for deletion/A, since some people's AfD helper userscripts placed their vote there by mistake. Segv11 (talk/contribs) 04:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, way too much information on a single restaurant to be encyclopedic. This seems like thinly disguised advertising. &mdash; J I P  | Talk 11:51, 10 January 2006 (UTC)


 * 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.