Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grand cru (food and drink)


 * 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. It appears that deletion is not an issue here. Whether the article should remain separate or be merged back into Grand cru, is not an issue for AfD. Tone 11:09, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Grand cru (food and drink)

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

Contested Prod. Guidelines and policies that apply here: Wikipedia is not a dictionary, Avoid neologisms, and No original research. The article is attempting to define the use of the term grand cru as it applies to food and drink outside of wine. The term Grand cru already has an article, where through disagreement about how to deal with use of the term beyond wine - Talk:Grand cru - this fork has been created.

And I suspect that Grand cru itself might be better dealt with in Classification of wine (where it's not even mentioned!) - so this Grand cru (food and drink) is potentially a fork of a fork.  SilkTork  *YES! 10:16, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

style="color:green">Oreo Priest ]]''' talk 04:21, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Seems to be to much of a WP:NEO and a lot of original research, and a google search does not turn up anything relevant, except wine articles that already are on the wiki.  Athe Weatherman   10:30, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * What Google search did you do? if you just searched the article's exact title, obviously you wont find anything. Try searching Grand Cru [food] with [food] being replaced by anything mentioned in the article. '''[[User:Oreo Priest| Athe Weatherman   08:37, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is not a neologism and it is not a dictionary definition. It is a wider cultural phenomenon that warrants explanation. The fork was created as a result of consensus, and is not a POVFORK in any sense of the term. Its use (in chocolate at least) is referenced by a reliable source.  Oreo Priest  talk 04:21, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Neutral I am sufficiently swayed by the other comments. Merge/Weak Delete Seems too dictionaryish at present. --Cyber cobra (talk) 06:23, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * A merger would be fine by me.  Oreo Priest  talk 14:21, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions.  -- Cyber cobra  (talk) 09:08, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep/Oppose Merger - The concept of Grand cru in wine is completely different than the concept used in chocolate, beer, etc. In wine, it has a set define meaning, regulated by official bodies. In other areas it is a marketing term used whenever the producer feels like it. While there may be room for potential expansion of the food & drink article, if it has to be dealt with in another context then transwiki would be FAR better than merging. AgneCheese/Wine 17:52, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep I don't see a neologism here, just extended use of a qualification, however unregulated, from one commodity to another, one that no longer fits with an article about wine production. Merging is therefore a bad idea. The article could clearly use some expansion, a see also section, etc but it has value as it stands. --mikaultalk 08:44, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep For evidence, here are some citations from the grand cru discussion page when the importance of this was being discussed:
 * "Facing the intensified international competition of the 1980s and heightened fears of increasingly centralized regulation, French chocolatiers and cultural taste makers attempted to stimulate new demand for craft commodities by promoting "genuine," "grand cru," or "vintage" French chocolate. "The cultural politics of food and eating" by James L. Watson, Melissa L. Caldwell, page 145. []
 * "A campaign created by Rumrill-Hoyt depicting the drama, emotion and impact expressed with black and white photography, won the top prize Grand Cru Gold Award." "Art direction" by National Association of Art Directors (U.S.), National Society of Art Directors, page 2. []
 * When searching for these, I also found an equestrian event in Australia using the term "grand cru" and a designation for students studying food that uses the term at a US school. Wakablogger2 (talk) 04:16, 1 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment This is going to be an awkward one for the closer, as the majority of comments are in favour of keeping. However, I would point out that the article fails on several of our guidelines, and a core policy of WP:OR; in addition it fails our WP:GNG as there is no significant coverage in reliable sources. The article creators are attempting to write an encyclopedic entry on a borrowed marketing term for which there has been no direct commentary. There may be room for a sentence in the Grand cru article, such as "the term Grand cru is sometimes borrowed to market other products such as chocolate and beer", but beyond that is pushing a point.  SilkTork  *YES! 08:06, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It seems you're alone in thinking that. I don't believe the article fails any of those guidelines.  Oreo Priest  talk 15:52, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe it should go in with the grand cru article, but without any discussion, it was moved to its own article (even though a great deal of discussion had preceded). The article mover/creator was not "attempting to write an encyclopedic entry" but simply trying to eliminate the other meanings of grand cru from the meaning relating to viticulture. It seemed obvious to me that no amount of discussion was going to result in an amicable accommodation under the grand cru article, so I gave up. Ultimately, I think this information is valuable and relevant and therefore should be kept. Wakablogger2 (talk) 21:32, 1 September 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.