Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qâlat Daqqa


 * 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 03:17, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Qâlat Daqqa

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

This article was created four months ago, and since then, no significant changes have been made to it. The article is not even worthy of being a stub. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. --Seascic T/C 09:04, 6 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete after moving any useful information to Tunisian cuisine. (ie, if this spice is particularly common/significant, if Tunisian cooking is characterized by this spice, etc).  &mdash;Politizer talk / contribs 09:25, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 *  Delete  as notability is not established. Boston (talk) 03:13, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Thanks for making needed improvements. Boston (talk) 08:19, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - This article is a requested article in the field of Herbs and Spices, and meets the four standards of notability:
 * Notability, reliable independent sources and verifiability has been established by the reference in a major educational book as cited. --Jeremy ( Blah blah... ) 04:06, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment The request for the article's creation is irrelevant to this discussion. A mention is one book does not establish notability. Boston (talk) 05:18, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 04:26, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - Proposing editor does not seem to have familiarity with our food notability guidelines. Please use "Discussion" and work together with the article creator and others to make this the best possible article on this subject rather than taking a confrontational approach and attempting to delete this article on a notable subject. Badagnani (talk) 07:56, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep There is reason to believe the subject is notable and a trip to a good library is all that's required to add sources. ChildofMidnight (talk) 09:34, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep also known as Galat dagga, for which there are 9000 google hits. this AfD, while made in good faith, has probably run afoul of Arabic transliteration. Totnesmartin (talk) 16:46, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. The references already in the article show notability, and there are more sources available such as |%20%22Galat%20dagga%22&sa=N&tab=np these books. Phil Bridger (talk) 17:44, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. References prove notability. And I want to know how it tastes. 169.229.109.115 (talk) 07:09, 9 December 2008 (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.