Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guangdong Hakka Mother Wine


 * 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. There appears to be a strong consensus against deletion with the OP apparently being OK with a page move. The issue of whether and where to move the article can be addressed elsewhere. Ad Orientem (talk) 03:55, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Guangdong Hakka Mother Wine

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

does not seem to be any different from rice wine - the term itself is not in use by secondary sources. Also, WP:NOTCOOKBOOK Seraphim System  ( talk ) 11:14, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:29, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Asia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:29, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wine-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:30, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. This is a real thing as far as I can tell. I searched for "客家娘酒" and found that an equivalent article exists on the Chinese Wikipedia as zh:客家黃酒. All the search results refer to "客家娘酒" as a specific type of rice wine. I'd say this article is slightly more than a cook book entry so there's no harm in keeping it. Deryck C. 11:20, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:09, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep per Deryck Chan. A Google Books search returns multiple sources about the subject. Cunard (talk) 04:17, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I could find any significant sources in English, but of course I did not know the Chinese characters when I nominated. I would prefer it be merged and redirected until someone translates the Chinese page, because there is no way to expand it without Chinese language sources, and because currently it is little more then a recipe, which Deryck Chan acknowleges. I'm not sure we can call it "normal editing" when the sources for a subject are exclusively in the Chinese langugae or I would support improvement over redirecting/merging. Seraphim System  ( talk ) 08:21, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
 * The article contains enough content and sources to justify a standalone article per Summary style. A merge would result in the loss of content like the "Folklore" section. It would be undue weight to merge Guangdong Hakka Mother Wine to rice wine. The sources show that the subject is notable so I think it's fine to keep the article as standalone. It's probably more likely that a knowledgeable editor will expand Guangdong Hakka Mother Wine if it remains a standalone article as opposed to being merged. Cunard (talk) 07:00, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Well I agree it would be nice if someone expanded it. But the folklore section is three sentences long, it absolutely would not be undue to merge and redirect until that happens. Seraphim System  ( talk ) 09:24, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I think the "Method of production" and "Mother Wine Chicken" sections provide value to readers. I don't think the sections are so unfixable that they should just be completely deleted. Cunard (talk) 05:07, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: See if we can't get a couple more editors to weigh in on this one...

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Onel 5969  TT me 21:47, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Move to Hakka rice wine, which is the literal translation of the Chinese wiki article title, or to Mother wine, which appears to be closer to the actual colloquial name. Ibadibam (talk) 07:34, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Would support moving to Hakka rice wine. as this seems to be term in use in the English language. Seraphim System  ( talk ) 13:10, 17 June 2017 (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.