Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pizza-ghetti


 * 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. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  04:26, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Pizza-ghetti

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

See WP:NEO. One of my friends made pasta and jelly tots once and called it pastatots. Does that mean Pastatots should exist? This is just a plate with two seperate items on it or ontop of each other and pasta made with pizza sauce is not exactly special or rare, its just a pasta dish. I'd seriously question if this even meets WP:N. Also many of the references are blogs/user edited content on recipe site. The reference articles do not talk about the 'dish' rather just mension the combination of pizza and spagetti in passing as a neologism. The article even says that the restaurant chain which shares the name of this 'dish' doesn't even have it on the menu. Cabe 6403  (Talk•Sign!) 14:40, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Replace with disambig per WP:NEO - "... should be avoided in Wikipedia articles because they are not well understood, are not clearly definable, and will have different meanings to different people" - Google test shows that its primarily known for a restaurant chain in the United Kingdom, so this can allow for both to be properly explained. --SteelersFanUK06  ReplyOnMine!   14:48, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey, don't give other editors ideas! MuZemike 20:07, 5 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose deletion: references show that Pizza-ghetti is a legitimate food served in restaurants in Quebec -- not at all like the pasta and jelly tots of Cabe6403's friend. WP:NEO does not apply: this is a standard item on Quebec menus. Here is what we read in this reference (scroll down to "3 am at the Casse Croute"): "I open up the menu, a small book of photocopied paper, and try to decide what to get. My choices include all of the casse-croûte standards: hamburgers, poutine, souvlaki, fried rice, pizza, spaghetti and, of course, pizza-ghetti, that unbeatable combo of soggy pizza and overcooked pasta served side-by-side." And this reference unequivocably defines Pizza-ghetti as "a Québec dish". Finally, the proposer's comment about the restaurant chain is a non-sequitur: that section has been added as a jocular counterpoint to the dish, not to support the dish. --Zlerman (talk) 15:03, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose disambig proposal: as noted above WP:NEO does not apply here. --Zlerman (talk) 15:03, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete. OK, so it has articles pointing to it, and some recipies, but I'm unclear as to how it becomes notable. Somebody change my mind. -- Dennis The Tiger   (Rawr and stuff) 19:08, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep WP:NEO doesn't seem to apply; the question is whether or not it is notable. I'm not sure if the article yet meets the notability guidelines, but it's certainly close, and given that it does seem to exist, and is considered "standard fare" for Quebec food, I don't think it would be impossible to find more reliable references. JazzMan 19:49, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete—I contest the reliability of all the sources in the article. I also could not find any other reliable sources that can establish verifiability that this is a popular and common dish in Quebec as claimed in the article. It also does not bode well when there are zero Google News hits. MuZemike 20:07, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - The dish exists in the form as described in the article and is notable as thousands of Quebequois eat it every week. It appears on numerous restaurant/cafe/casse croute menus (e.g. or  or, and many others) throughout the province. That the same phrase is used for different dishes in different part of the world does not justify deleting one of the meanings and both are mentioned in this article. Similarly, just because a restaurant in the UK uses a portmanteau of its principal dishes as its name, but doesn't actually serve "pizza-ghetti", is not a logical reason for deleting this. The article is fine as it stands, doesn't misrepresent anything, and actually refers to a real dish.  Pyrop  e  20:44, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Just because resautants have something on their menu's does not make it worthy of inclusion in wikipedia. For example, Jack Daniels Chicken many restaurants (such as T.G.I. Friday's have that item on their menu, Jack Daniels is a product, Chicken is a product so should an article about the Jack Daniels Chicken dish exists? -- Cabe  6403  (Talk•Sign!) 23:19, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Why not? If enough can be gathered together to make an article, even a stub, perhaps you could argue that a discrete dish exists and could have a page, should someone want to write one. To turn your debating style back on yourself, fried fish is a product, and chips are a product, so why do we have a separate page about fish and chips? Just because it is a better known dish? It is still just two products combined on a plate.  Pyrop e  14:37, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I see where you're coming from there but ask virtually anyone about Fish and chips and they'll know of that dish. It's a world famous dish popular in many different countries. Remember WP:OTHERSTUFF, just because one article exists on a comination dish like this does not mean that all such dishes should have an article. The reliability of the sources has been contested too with users unable to find any reliable sources that establish WP:V. One of the key principles of Wikipedia is the ability to verify the source(s) of an article. As stated; It also does not bode well when there are zero Google News hits meaning few (if not none) mentions in popular articles. -- Cabe  6403  (Talk•Sign!) 17:48, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Unless someone can explain what makes a food notable, I see no reason not to treat existing foods as inherently notable. Also, it has encyclopedic potential. It can be expanded with information on who first made it and why. -Mgm|(talk) 21:59, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I would say the same notability requirements that cover every article covers this. I can't see any major publication about "Pizza-ghetti", one minor publication mentions it as spagetti on pizza and the rest are either blogs or sites with user created content. Cabe  6403  (Talk•Sign!) 23:19, 5 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep as article appears to cross, if only just, the verifiability and notability thresholds. With expansion, this article could be as useful and informative as poutine has become. - Dravecky (talk) 22:51, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Quebec-related deletion discussions.   --  Double Blue  (talk) 02:49, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - the references suggest it is suitable for inclusion Scapler (talk) 03:47, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment the Wiktionary Entry was deleted, so if it can't survive there... why would it survive here? 76.66.196.229 (talk) 06:26, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't be a pessimist. On en:Wikipedia we go by consensus (or so I hope...). --Zlerman (talk) 06:44, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Not necessarily, if an article clearly meets one of the criteria for deletion then even with 100 keep votes the article will be deleted. This is rare however so most of the time, you are right, we go by consensus/arguments. Cabe  6403  (Talk•Sign!) 17:48, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per notability concerns expressed by other users. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:25, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - When I was in Italy I saw several places that served Spaghetti Pizzas. Readro (talk) 23:22, 10 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep – Many other simple food combinations have become recognizable dishes and this is reflected in articles such as: biscuits and gravy, mince and tatties, rice and beans, bangers and mash, half and half, Arnold Palmer, and so forth.  Once the name of a dish spreads beyond its origin and a group&mdash;be they restaurateurs, diners, chefs, home cooks, cookbook authors, food critics, or some combination&mdash;start using a common name to refer to the same dish, you have the essence of notability.  Provided the dish has its origins in a place with newspapers, printing presses, and widespread Internet access, finding sources is a matter of digging.        In using Google News Search&mdash;including the Google News Archive, which no one above has mentioned checking&mdash;to find news coverage of an item, do realize that coverage is far from thorough.  In particular the Google News Archive has only recent coverage of the Wall Street Journal, The Economist, The Guardian, The Times of London, and other such obscure papers.  Digital text searches of these papers can still be done, but the search often needs to be done through the paper's own digital archive or a pay database.  Expecting Google News coverage to be thorough for French newspapers in Quebec is expecting more than Google is likely to deliver.        Anyway, checking the Google News Archive for "pizzaghetti" returns a couple of hits that use its meaning as a Quebecois dish.  One is in French at the website of monteregieweb.com.  The second is from the York Daily Record with a Google News Archive summary of "They offer Pizzaghetti - an eight-inch pizza with a half portion of spaghetti and salad for $5.50".  Taking my own advice seriously and using the search functions of a Canadian paper or two, I found further mentions on the websites of the Waterloo Region Record, the Montreal Gazette, and a couple of others.        As a final observation, when pizzaghetti is mentioned in Quebec, the writer assumes the reader knows the meaning of the term.  When it is being written about outside of Quebec, the writer includes a short description of the dish. &mdash; VulcanOfWalden (talk) 01:25, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. There appear to be enough sources as demonstrated in the discussion here and my own cursory google web and news search to verify this as a dish. If there are multiple uses for the term, that can be explained best in the article. Double Blue  (talk) 02:50, 11 February 2009 (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.