Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of martini variations


 * 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 redirect to Martini (cocktail). [ Insert ironic comment about being neither shaken nor stirred by this subject ] Spartaz Humbug! 06:06, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

List of martini variations

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Completely unreferenced article (except for two incidental citations of specific martini variants), fails WP:VERIFY; possibly also WP:ORIGINAL. Fundamentally, the article is trying to do an impossible thing, to create a comprehensive taxonomy of drinks that may or may not be variations of a martini, either in name or nature; at best it is always going to be only a partial list, and almost inevitably include things that shouldn't be there. The article has been around for many years and gone through different incarnations, each with their problems, and I think it's finally time to put it out of its misery. Any genuinely worthwhile content can be merged into the main martini article. DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:14, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep There are numerous books written entirely about martini cocktails and these naturally list lots of variations. Examples include: The Little Black Book of Martinis; Martini Book: 201 Ways to Mix the Perfect American Cocktail; The Martini Field Guide; 101 Martinis; &c.  Finding references is therefore not a problem.  See WP:IMPERFECT; WP:NEXIST; WP:SOFIXIT; &c. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:04, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:45, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:45, 27 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Partial merge Per nom, anything worth keeping can go at martini, a short article that can certainly incorporate the sources above! Reywas92Talk 20:02, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. Writing a well-referenced article is definitely possible per Andrew's sources, and the current content is not so hopelessly bad that it needs WP:TNT. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:35, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Sources are recipe collections, not necessarily substantive content. Wikipedia is not a cookbook cataloguing 200 ways to mix drinks, nor is anything keeping these sources from being used in the main article. Reywas92Talk 23:10, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect into Martini_(cocktail), where there's already a section, with much of the same verbatim text, much better sourced than this. Nom is correct, some of the previous versions were  in content and format, and arguably worth rescue.  Unfortunately none of that was ever sourced.  The existing taxonomy is wrongheaded unsourced OR and not worth merging.  --Lockley (talk) 09:17, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Lockley. As was stated, no merge is necessary; the information's already there, and well sourced.  (And that being said, at the fourteen year mark, we have a reasonable expectation that an article will either be sourced or -- as per WP:V, "any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material. Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed."  This AfD has been going on for a week now, and no one has seen fit to do the simple sourcing that has been claimed is easily done.)   Ravenswing      22:06, 2 August 2020 (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.