Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of foods that sweat


 * 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. T. Canens (talk) 10:37, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

List of foods that sweat

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable list and seems to be more of a joke than anything else as toast does not sweat but the water vapour molecules in the hot toast condense on the cold plate, and cheese loses it moisture because of the osmosis created by the salt content. i tagged as a hoax but this was refused as was the PROD because "sweating food is a common term" ...the mind boggles... Domdeparis (talk) 09:45, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep – ridiculous reason for AfD. See WP:COMMONAME and Sweating (cooking) . Laurdecl talk 09:52, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete – Ignore above, I thought this was nominated because of "sweat" not being the correct term (as opposed to "foods that condense" or whatever). I added a short paragraph about the foods "sweating" in their relevant articles. Laurdecl talk 02:26, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment As I explained on your talk page Sweating (cooking) is a technique for preparing food and not the loss of moisture from food which is the topic of the article. Most food will lose moisture at one point or another by different mechanisms, evaporation, osmosis etc but none of this is "sweating".  To describe food as sweating is just the use of a term that describes the production of fluids secreted by the sweat glands in the skin of mammals for the loss of moisture because the person doesn't know how to describe the mechanism. It would be just as logical to have a list of animals or objects that "speak" because certain people do not have a rich enough vocabulary to describe correctly the noise they hear. As almost all food loses moisture at one point or another it is possible to observe this phenomena and then say that the food is sweating and in that case the list would include en infinite number of foods...--Domdeparis (talk) 10:09, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. North America1000 11:50, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. North America1000 11:50, 12 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete While the creation is well-intentioned I think this is taking 2 sources that use the common word "sweat" and making it into "a thing", that is "foods that sweat". This is like creating your own neologism, but the sources do not support such a thing, sorry. ValarianB (talk) 15:37, 12 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - Appears to be largely synthesis, as the article creator seems to have taken information from two different (and both seemingly unreliable) sources about two completely different processes that both just happened to use the term "sweat" to describe the wet look, and decided that this was some sort of official catch-all terminology for "food that looks wet", which it is not. As already mentioned, this has nothing to do with the actual cooking term "sweating", which is a manner of preparation and has absolutely nothing to do with this article's made-up topic.  64.183.45.226 (talk) 17:33, 12 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete Please. This is not encyclopedic, not notable, not sourced reliably, etc. Two random articles use the term "sweat" to describe two completely different phenomena, and a pattern is revealed? No. Glendoremus (talk) 19:18, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. I find no evidence that "food that sweats" (as contrasted with the culinary technique of sweating (cooking)) is treated as a coherent topic in reliable sources.  Thus, not a suitable subject for a list under Notability.--Arxiloxos (talk) 22:08, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete as per WP:NOR. Non notable topic regardless. Ajf773 (talk) 04:07, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete as OR; utterly trivial and non-notable. As regulars at Afd know, it takes a lot for me to say that about a list -- but this is not encyclopedic. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:24, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - per everyone above Spiderone  13:02, 14 January 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.