Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boneless meat


 * 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 no consensus. and none appears to be emerging with valid input on three sides Star   Mississippi  14:34, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Boneless meat

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

WP:N, plus lack of WP:RS; all but one source is a blog post Wallnot (talk) 17:19, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - it seems to me to be self-evident that this is a Thing. Arguably more suited to a dictionary than an encyclopedia, but I can't see a good argument for delete. JMWt (talk) 17:43, 19 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep This is a common category of meat product. Discussions of meat products will often use "boneless meat" to discuss this type of meat. There is definitely an indepth, policy-compliant encyclopedia article that could be written here. W 42  18:10, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Moving to Delete and merge into respective articles with a redirect to meat. I'm finding the SYNTH and DICDEF arguments convincing. Meh. Keep I guess. I suppose this could be expanded to include other boneless meats...boneless roasts, chops, etc. Their uses and the reasons for using them over bone-in items. This is one sad article, though. I never understand why food articles get so little love. We all eat lol. Valereee (talk) 18:36, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it looks like there's a ton out there. I spent a few minutes and doubled it, created two new redirects. It can be expanded easily, I think. Valereee (talk) 19:00, 19 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep. Boneless wings are extremely popular, especially in the United States. This is borderline trolling. InvadingInvader (talk) 19:45, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * So much for AGF. Wallnot (talk) 13:53, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Popular isn't how we assess notability. Significant coverage in independent reliable sources is how we assess. And I have no idea why anyone would think this was trolling. It's completely reasonable to look at where this article was when it was nominated and understand why it was nominated. There aren't even any good google hits for "boneless meat". Valereee (talk) 14:27, 20 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Weak merge to Chicken as food, Beef, etc. and redirect... somewhere. Meat, maybe, with a small section in there? I actually think this is improper synthesis, although not the worst. There's little that's meaningful and verifiable that can be said about boneless meat as a whole. I'd change my mind if could give an example of their assertion that Discussions of meat products will often use "boneless meat" to discuss this type of meat. "Boneless chicken", "boneless beef", "boneless roast", sure—but do we have a source that contrasts boneless meats from different animals? There is stuff on total sales, like, but that's not quite enough for me, especially because boneless meat constitutes the majority of sales in most places—just put it in the meat article. Usually the contrast is between bone-in and boneless meat, so information on the latter (and the former) belongs in the meats' respective articles, for better contextualization. Ovinus (talk) 20:03, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete DICDEF. I mean, it pretty much tells you what it is without much help. Oaktree b (talk) 20:09, 19 October 2022 (UTC)


 * I'll note this article was created (converted from a redirect to Meat) by a serial sock. Valereee (talk) 15:06, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Relisting after article improvements. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:11, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero  Parlez Moi 10:51, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep I used this article to find out more about boneless "chicken wings" which, as it turns out, are not any kind of wing! This content belongs somewhere, a merge at worst, but preferably keep. 209.44.206.239 (talk) 07:05, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Strong delete. Remove this mess of a stub that was created by a serial sock. At most, merge bits of it into relevant articles such as Chicken as food. Most of the sources are weak. Sure, the NYT source is valid, but it can go with a merged item into something about the specific type it refers to. It is not generally about boneless meat. Who is voting keep on this? Doczilla  @SUPERHEROLOGIST 21:46, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep and expand with more specific sources. Boneless meat in a culinary context, and the process of deboning in an food preparation/agricultural context, certainly meet GNG and are distinct enough topics to warrant this article. 193.37.240.45 (talk) 13:38, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
 * The problem is there are no sources on boneless meat in a culinary context; there are sources on boneless chicken, boneless beef, etc., and putting them together in an article is impermissible WP:SYNTH. It's also not at all clear why this subject is distinct from Meat, Chicken as food, etc.—given that the article is a stub, the handful of good, sourced content could easily be merged into these articles. Wallnot (talk) 14:24, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Maybe there are not better sources in this article, but I did a cursory Google scholar search and it appears there are absolutely existing sources with in-depth coverage of boneless meat in general. BlackholeWA (talk) 19:24, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you could link the search, as I am not seeing any/many. Wallnot (talk) 19:30, 3 November 2022 (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.