Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dirt cake (2nd nomination)


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Based on keep rationales back both this and the original AfD nom back in 2010, Valley2city (talk) 03:54, 8 April 2024 (UTC) Valley2city (talk) 03:54, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Dirt cake
AfDs for this article:


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

Previously nominated for deletion back in 2010 where it was decided to keep the article, but I'm renominating it as the sources do not hold up. As to Niteshift36's analysis of the sources way back when: "Sources 1 and 3 are the same one, and doesn't even give a full recipe. It only gives a one sentence description. Source 2 is solely a recipe. Source 4 is the recipe and a woman talking about her personal experience with it". These sources are not enough to establish notability and a WP:BEFORE check yielded no sources that show WP:SIGCOV. BaduFerreira (talk) 19:00, 25 March 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:14, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. BaduFerreira (talk) 19:00, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  19:33, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment: I'm not sure what the notability for food items are... I can find recipes, but I'm not sure that's enough "discussion" of the thing the article is about. Oaktree b (talk) 22:41, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
 * My understanding is that there aren't special notability guidelines for food articles, so they should be judged against WP:GNG. This isn't official guideline, but Wikiproject Food and Drink has discussed this notability issue in the past. BaduFerreira (talk) 22:51, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Recipes cannot be considered as coverage because every dish has a recipe. It's about the context in which the recipes became popular (star chef, regional cuisine, etc.). Killarnee (talk) 16:25, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep Unlike your other recent food nominations I've supported, I think this one does have more coverage as a recognizable, distinct dish rather than just recipes involving a particular ingredient. Moreover, even though there are some variations, it's a clear concept and I don't see another article it would be covered in. Sources include Oreo coming out with a dirt cake flavor, a Guinness record for largest dirt cake, and bakeries' dirt cakes served in pots. On newspapers.com, I see results dating to 1988! There are older ones calling a similar recipe "cinder cake". Reywas92Talk 17:47, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I saw the new Oreo flavor source, but felt that it wasn't significant enough coverage to warrant an article, but I didn't see the other sources you've provided. I think the three you've presented along with a few more articles that I found on newspapers.com (thank you for this suggestion, I personally haven't tried newspaper.com before this), should be enough to prove this dessert's notability. BaduFerreira (talk) 20:54, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep Sources seem fine, we have a bit more context and some description of the type of cake being used in other food products. Notability for food products is a new thing for me. Oaktree b (talk) 00:43, 2 April 2024 (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.