Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Butter tart


 * 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 keep.

Not even a recipe; maybe Wiktionary material, but everybody has these things: not notable. &#8212; Bill 19:15, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * It's a substub, but that's not reason for deletion. The question is, can it expand? Abstain for now. Darksun 19:51, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, recipes typically don't stay here, only blurbs about recipes that are of significance, which this substub does not accomplish. Change to significant content and I'll change my vote. -Vina 21:35, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: If deleted, remove its entry from Canadian cuisine (which was added by the same author). Rossami
 * My stomach says Eat, but my brain says Delete. Brain wins -- I don't think food descriptions/recipies/etc are encyclopedic. --Improv 22:25, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep An important and historically significant part of Canadian cuisine and culture. I added a link to a CBC radio segment on them.  The Steve  23:21, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Nice short article which establishes its claim to being encyclopedic and even cites its source for the claim. My one regret is I can't keep this and eat it too. Would some kind Canadian like to increase the torture by doing some cooking and photography? Andrewa 01:39, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep very yummy and well within normal standards of inclusion. -- Netoholic @ 02:46, 2004 Oct 7 (UTC)
 * Side note: This article was only a few hours old when Bill VFD'd it. Not giving articles time to expand is exactly how you scare away good contributors. -- Netoholic @ 02:50, 2004 Oct 7 (UTC)
 * Keep for reasons above. &mdash; siro  &chi;  o  03:05, Oct 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep - I've already learned something, I didn't know they were unique to Canada. I thought everyone had butter tarts. You're missing out! Adam Bishop 04:49, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - if Wikipedia isn't big enough for Butter tarts, we may as well just scrap the project outright. Sarge Baldy 04:53, Oct 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep - Mmmm...butter tarts. Mackensen 04:56, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep - perfectly good food stub. Gentgeen 05:43, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep because it explains significance and origin of subject. --Cje 06:31, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep It may be a stub but it's culturally significant, and tastes great —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.50.137.190 (talk) 03:59, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

OK folks, you win, Keep even if it's hard to imagine how encyclopedic this could get. (I have no objections to food, and on a visit to Edmonton became very happily acquainted with Banbury tarts for which I notice we have no entry!) Comments follow, though. (1) Similar pastries do exist in various countries, there should probably be, eventually, a Category to put it in. (2) Googling taught me quickly that the name also applies to a Scottish item; to see which was the more important, I ran a Google search for "butter tart" (Scottish|Canadian), 1440 with Scottish coming in first, then searches for Scottish (370), Canadian (1360), and not Scottish not Canadian, 972. This suggests a better name for the present article: Canadian butter tart; and a disambig page at Butter tart? &#8212; Bill 11:56, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * Strong keep in present form. By all means, Bill should gently edit the article to reflect his research. I'm not sure of policy/practice, but it has always seemed to me that when there isn't much material on any of the alteratives, the disambiguation page can and should be the article (e.g. as I've done with chunking). Refactoring into a disambiguation page and separate article can and should be deferred until the combined article gets to be "too long," however long that is. Thus I'd suggest keeping the present article and breaking it into two sections, "Canadian butter tarts" and a short note on "Other butter tarts." Just my $0.02. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 16:38, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * OK folks, the deed is done; I removed the Vfd and edited as NPOV as I know how. &#8212; Bill 20:07, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

True and true. There is, however, a pretty good article: In-N-Out. And so close to dinner, too. - Lucky 6.9 02:12, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. I've never seen these things down here below the 48th Parallel, which is strange because my area gets a lot of Canadian tourists during the season who stay here as many as six months out of the year.  OTOH, Canada doesn't have In-N-Out Burger, so there.  :^)  Interesting and eminently expandable. - Lucky 6.9 22:07, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Most of the US doesn't have In-N-Out Burger either. -- Cyrius|&#9998; 00:45, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * We don't have them in the East. I'm trying to think what they could be. I can conceptualize an "In-N-Out Burger" in several ways, all gross. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 01:52, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * You so naaaasty. :^P  Check out the website:  .  This is mostly a Southern California phenomenon that's spread only about as far as Arizona and Nevada.  Think of it as the West Coast's White Castle.  Wonder if there's an article...?  It's certainly notable enough. - Lucky 6.9 02:09, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Not even west coast, we don't have them here in Oregon. Sarge Baldy 02:10, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)

end moved discussion
 * 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.