Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Banana split pie


 * 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 was   redirect to Banana split. Merging, if required, can be done so from the article history as long as it is attributed appropriately. (non-admin closure) Steven   Zhang  Help resolve disputes! 00:12, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Banana split pie

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A single mention of a pie called this winning a cookery contest doesn't seem notable enough for an article on it. Sources don't seem to agree as to what exactly the banana split pie is - many different dishes are called this. After looking for further sources to establish notability, I made this into a redirect to banana split with a merger of the information there, as they were both desserts but the redirect was reverted. All the sources I am seeing are either recipes (for a variety of different dishes all called this) or passing mentions, even for Ms Winquest (in a list of other winners, including hamwiches, meringue cradle pie, and salmon cheese pie, which by the reasoning here, should all have articles too...) Definitely worth discussing, but I can't see how it passes notability. Mabalu (talk) 11:39, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:15, 10 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep - I'm not sure we've dealt with the question of recipes at any length at AfD. Just going the OTHERSTUFF route for the moment, there's a nice piece on Key lime pie and given the number of Google hits (including mainstream magazines) for Banana split pie, it seems possible that this would develop in a similar way over time. Mmmmmmmm, pie. ILIKEIT. Carrite (talk) 16:14, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The Key Lime pie article is different though, in that key lime pie has a worldwide identity and is well documented internationally. I'm not sure if the banana split pie has the same identity. I mean, key lime pie or Mississippi mud pie, you have a pretty good idea what they are supposed to be, but I don't really see agreement or even clear consensus on what a banana split pie is supposed to be. It does seem a bit nebulous and open to personal interpretation, which is not really encyclopaedic. Mabalu (talk) 16:43, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll stand down to ease the consensus call for the closing administrator. A decent enough debate, I'm sold. Carrite (talk) 21:06, 25 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 15:14, 17 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Redirect - Not sure why we need to split up all variations of a banana split into separate articles. I can only find recipe references for banana split pie. Looks tasty, but believe it should have a subheading under banana split and then redirected there. Key lime pie and banana split articles are worldwide identities and deserve articles, but I do not see why variations should. Next would be the banana split drink. --FoolMeOnce2Times (talk) 15:48, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - Well, okay, let's treat this like any other topic at WP for a moment. THIS RECIPE on the website of FoodNetwork.com would count as substantial, independently published coverage about the subject of the article, would it not? And THIS is the same treatment from the site of the venerable magazine Woman's Day...  So you want a newspaper? THIS is an article (mark that, an article) by Michele Reiter in the Bowling Green Sentinel Tribune. At a certain point we need to say, yes, this dessert is the subject of multiple instances of independently-published journalism and therefore passes GNG. Carrite (talk) 17:24, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - So your point is that since the recipe for the item gets significant coverage that it should have an article about the finished product? If that is the case, we should use this reference from the Food Network along with this reference from Taste of Home to have an article about beef stew. As you can see, Beef stew is redirected into the article for Stew. I do not see an issue with including the information in Banana split with a redirect, similar to that with beef stew. Also, the article is about the finished product while the sources are about how to make the product. Not sure that instructions on how to build a specific "gadget" makes that gadget notable.--FoolMeOnce2Times (talk) 18:18, 17 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - Non-notable item, there is no description of the product, the sources are questionable at best. There is no coverage in proper reliable sources beyond recipes, which only show verifiability but do not connote notability. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 21:16, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Redirect into Banana split. Jerem43 is right about the sources. The article is barebones and bald on refs, which are weak in quality. Borderline is Grilled cheese sandwich redirecting to Cheese sandwich, which it does. Banana split pie is at best worth a section in Banana split. That would serve visitors best. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:26, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Banana split. This is essentially just a variant of the classic dish. And while this is a bit WAXy, there's no way this is more notable than a grilled cheese. --BDD (talk) 23:57, 24 April 2013 (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.