Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/McDonald's urban legends


 * 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 of the debate was no consensus to delete, but feel free to boldly merge. —Cleared as filed. 13:57, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

McDonald's urban legends
Delete. Wikipedia is not Snopes, and the information is not of any substantial value. Any relevant information from this article that should be saved can easily be merged into the main McDonald's article. Deadsalmon 12:10, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Mostly not-verifiable. External links are not directly related to content of article.  Merge any verifable content into McDonald's and Urban Legend. Crunch 12:48, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep It does have references and tries to give both points of view. I got rid of that 'debunking fact' rubbish -- Astrokey44 |talk 15:12, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - fairly well-written and referenced. Essexmutant 16:11, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. The references consist of several articles which mention the pig fat thing, McDonald's own pages which verify the one about how many countries McD's operates in (though not that there is a notable urban legend relating to it), and Rotten.com, which is so far from being a reliable source it's not funny. The McLibel case is covered elsewhere and I don't think pig fat and the countries thing merit an article of their own. The others are all introduced with something along the lines of "There is a rumour", which is a meaningless weasel term. --Malthusian (talk) 16:53, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge verifiable material back into McDonald's. Daniel Case 17:27, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge what's useful into the main entry, delete the rest. 19:12 UTC 10 January 2006
 * Salvage the suitable stuff, merge with McDonalds, and Delete this informative but largely pointless piece. doktorb | words 19:15, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete The verifiability policy puts the burden of proof on the contributor to cite sources. This article is so well-written I thought it might be a copyvio, but some key phrases don't Google as exact phrases. If everything in it were sourced, I'd vote "keep" on the grounds that I find it interesting and it's long enough to stand on its own as a separate article. Unfortunately, at present almost nothing in it is properly sourced or verifiable, so I see almost nothing in it to "salvage." Too bad, as the incidents in it ring true, are probably accurate, and would be worth keeping if sourced. Will change my vote if the article is greatly improved before expiration of AfD. I believe I'll go tag the unsourced statements. Dpbsmith (talk) 21:03, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. JohnLeemk asked me to take another look. I think it's adequately sourced now; topic is borderline but article is now reasonably encyclopedic; and this would make a disproportionately large section if merged into McDonald's. 13:15, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * you shouldn't delete this article because the information it provides as it is titled, are legends, meaning that they have a tendency to lack of vericity, therefore these information is only usefull for amusing and as a reference to the history of this huge company called Mcdonald's — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.139.145.161 (talk • contribs)
 * You've pretty much summed up the reason to delete. This is an encyclopaedia; we can only include stuff that is verified. We can talk about rumours and urban legends, but only if it's verified that anyone actually talks about them; of all those here, only two 'rumours' are verified as existing (pig fat and McLibel). --Malthusian (talk) 18:37, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge per Crunch and Deadsalmon MiracleMat 17:51, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * McDelete. Sorry, couldn't help myself.  Jtmichcock 04:21, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge whatever bits have cites and delete the rest. Kafziel 16:02, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete the article. Add a section to McDonald's article with the verifiable bits.  RicDod 14:55, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. A few minutes on Google, and I've gotten reputable sources for all but a couple of the rumours. This appears to be a worthy topic, and certainly more notable than Chicken McNuggets, IMO. I'm in the process of adding these sources to the article; here is a sample of them. Johnleemk | Talk 12:30, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * By the way, I have added another rumour to the article, also citing a reputable source. I firmly believe it would be impractical to merge this into the main McDonald's article because of its size. Johnleemk | Talk 13:07, 16 January 2006 (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.