Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Minuteman Salsa


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 03:43, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Minuteman Salsa

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

borderline N. There are some sources ("sauces"), most of which are local audience ("not foreign") [couldn't resist]. Still, local press fails WP:GNG. Currently fails V, SPA/COI promo. WP:TNT Widefox ; talk 12:02, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  13:02, 10 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete - At best this might merit a slight merge somewhere in a "popular culture" section of an article about the immigration debate; I hardly think we need an entire article to mention a barely-noticed failed product. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 12:26, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep While there were no news articles to speak of in a gNews search, I did find the salsa and the company mentioned in four books each of which confirms the general facts in the article and each of which touches on differing aspects of the story of the salsa and the founding of the company that made it. I've added the citations for the books to the article and also pulled up and linked the webarchive of the company website as one other cite. I've also cleaned up the article just a bit. It can use some more work, of course. Notability is not temporary, so the fact that the company is defunct is not telling in this analysis. There are reliable, third party, independent sources supporting notability. No one is more surprised than myself at my !vote, but I think it's warranted in this case. Take another look at the article and check out the sources I've added. Geoff &#124; Who, me? 21:31, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Quick review - good work, but... my gut feeling is that notability is from Minuteman Project and a merge there is common sense as this is doomed to be stub-ish, and in popular-culture-ish/news-ish. My crystal ball says it fails WP:10YT. Widefox ; talk 07:42, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 00:54, 18 March 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete at best and later Draft and Userfy if needed because this apparently is currently not existing and is thus questionable for any improvements. With the current article being questionable, there's nothing convincing to keep. SwisterTwister   talk  05:52, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Onel 5969  TT me 16:54, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:58, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:58, 27 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep per Geoff's improvements. Article space is cheap. clpo13(talk) 19:42, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep I think this has borderline notability, but the news coverage IMHO establishes that the product existed and was discussed in sufficient depth. --Slashme (talk) 10:14, 8 April 2016 (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.