Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dipped Fruit


 * 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   delete. — Travis talk  00:39, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Dipped Fruit

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Former speedy deletion candidate that was declined for no other reason than not being able to find a criterion that fit. Nonetheless, the article makes no assertion of notability whatsoever and will certain fail general notability. SchuminWeb (Talk) 15:25, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Now the Article is edited and is unique now. I think it should be on Wikipedia as it dosn't match with any of the other articles here.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Famzz (talk • contribs) 13:13, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Unneccesary duplicate of Fondue which states the obvious. - Mgm|(talk) 20:04, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as a how-to essay. WillOakland (talk) 22:54, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep it is a legitimate cuisine subject and not (necessarily) the same as a fondue dessert as claimed above. Though after taking out the how to and OR and unsourced claims (kids really like dipped fruit) there won't be much left of the article.  Sp in ni  ng  Spark  23:46, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Agree that this duplicates Fondue and everything covered in this article is more appropriate to that section of Fondue. Otherwise, this is a non-notable subject for a separate article. If the fondue article doesn't properly cover dipped fruit, as Spinningspark argues, then Chocolate fountain does. Geoff  TC 20:42, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:47, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete or Redirect to Fondue - reads like an instruction manual rather than an encyclopaedic article and duplicates information already found elsewhere. waggers (talk) 10:20, 14 January 2009 (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.