Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Starbucks Beverages


 * 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. Chetblong T C 01:42, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

List of Starbucks Beverages

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

Advertising-like commercial information lacking notability. Wikipedia is not a directory, a how-to guide, nor a repository of restaurant menus. Orlady (talk) 00:47, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong (Speedy?) Delete Definitely a NOT violation, and could be considered blatant advertising. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 00:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment User:Orlady did try speedying it, and I declined on the basis that it didn't seem blatant enough for a G11 speedy. Indeed, there are quite a few other comparable articles on Wikipedia that nobody seems to have problems with (see, for example, Ben & Jerry's flavors - not that I'm pulling a WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, but I don't think it can be reasonably argued that any article that lists a company's product is necessarily blatant advertising). Sarcasticidealist (talk) 01:06, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Clarification: I am not the one who requested speedy deletion of this article. It was Dendodge who requested speedy deletion. About half an hour after you declined speedy deletion, I saw the article in Special:Newpages, reviewed the history, and decided it was a candidate for AfD. --Orlady (talk) 01:12, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Right-so. Apologies for my confusion. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 01:14, 17 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - in the current state the article is in substub form, and the urging need for having the topic covered has not been established (although I'd say that hypothetically, a good article on Starbucks coffees would perhaps be more considerable to be kept). Pundit | utter  01:10, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, Wikipedia is not a menu. Lankiveil (speak to me) 01:27, 17 February 2008 (UTC).
 * Delete per above comments. ЭLСОВВОLД  talk 02:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - A textbook vio of WP:DIRECTORY. WP:DIRECTORY: "[Wikipedia articles are not:] Directories, directory entries, electronic program guide, or a resource for conducting business."  Jd 027  chat 03:51, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep if expanded. if the place is notable enough, its menu can be important. As the various things available there are typically referred to not just individually, but as a class of culturally significant objects, I think this could be a possible article. Compare McDonald's products (international) and the many similar aticlesDGG (talk) 05:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: Wikipedia is not a directory. I can see a notable beverage listed on the main page, similar to how Big Mac revolutionized McDonald's line-up, but Starbucks has none of that outside of... coffee. In comparison, the Big Mac has history, specialized drinks rarely, if ever, do.  Seicer  (talk) (contribs) 06:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Gary King (talk) 09:26, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - non-notable, advertising listcruft. This is not an encyclopedic list. What's next - List of KFC meals??? EJF (talk) 18:41, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Would Burger King products surprise you? how about McDonald's products? Exit2DOS2000   •T•C•  08:10, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It does actually, but those two articles are well-sourced and encyclopedic, this is just a menu. EJF (talk) 19:12, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, It's blatant advertising. Starbucks sells this, this and this. It's like a TV ad. Wikipedia is not a restaurant directory. If we kept a copy of every restaurant menu in the world Wikipedia's webspace would be used up in a year! Thanks, George D. Watson  (Dendodge). Talk Help and assistance 00:14, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Perhaps a list like this might have potential per DGG (McDonalds and Burger King have reasonably well developed articles about their products), but when in the current state, the article is not useful to the readers. It is basically saying that a coffee shop chain sells four common types of coffee, and that was fairly obvious. Sjakkalle (Check!)  07:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, as above. Axl (talk) 21:01, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per most of the above. Sorry DGG. Many re-create later under a different title. Bearian (talk) 20:26, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete if there's no room in the main article for this then there's no room on Wikipedia for it. This is not an encyclopedic topic. Perhaps in 50 years, when Starbucks has become an entirely different business, there will be some historical interest in what products they used to sell. But right now, this is free advertisement for the chain. Pichpich (talk) 00:54, 23 February 2008 (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.