Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soup all'Imperatrice


 * 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 delete. No sources other than the one cookbook (which does appear notable) have been found, and even the one "keep" opinion agrees that "that one source may not be enough to establish notability".  Sandstein  19:59, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Soup all'Imperatrice

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Hoax article with a single source which appears to be a hoax book by Paul Cresswell Theroadislong (talk) 20:56, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Theroadislong (talk) 20:56, 7 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment - it may be worth noting that the editor who created this article quoted the source as "The Cook's Decameron: A Study in Taste, Containing Over Two Hundred Recipes for Italian Dishes" which is a valid source from 1901. I would not contest a deletion for a number of other reasons, but the original source looks sound.  Velella  Velella Talk 21:02, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - Is there some sort of WP:NDISH apart fron WP:GNG? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:24, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - Another source does exist, however it is in Italian. Blaze The Wolf &#124; Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 21:25, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm quite happy to be proved wrong here, just that the given source did look like an elaborate hoax. Theroadislong (talk) 21:29, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The problem with that source is, as I said, it's in Italian. It would need to have its info translated and then put on the article. Blaze The Wolf &#124; Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 21:40, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 1854, impressive. Now I want to know which Empress. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:30, 7 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment — @, what is saying is that they feel both the article and the source used is a hoax. They aren’t saying it’s a bad source because it’s an Italian one, rather their argument is that it may be a hoax. A non English source is just as good as an English source. Or is there an RFC I’m not aware of? Celestina007 (talk) 22:09, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying it's a bad source. I'm just saying there might be some issues getting it to be part of the article because it's italian so it would have to have the information being put into the article translated. Blaze The Wolf &#124; Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 22:44, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep for now. This is not a hoax and the book is not a hoax, and the book is in English not Italian. There is a Wikipedia stub article about it, The Cook's Decameron, and the Gutenberg Project hosts the full public domain text of the book. Here is the recipe:

That one source may not be enough to establish notability but it invalidates earlier arguments to delete. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  02:07, 8 May 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Note that I have AfD'd The Cook's Decameron because of unclear notability.
 * Comment Here is a 1902 review of this cookbook in the magazine associated with The Boston Cooking-School Cook Book. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  02:20, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - I have looked through a few of my Italian cookbooks, including Lidia Bastianich's Mastering the Art of Italian Cuisine. It isn't mentioned anywhere. I haven't been able to find any reliable sources online, even using the Italian zuppa all'Imperatric. It is not the same as Carne all'Imperatrice. I also did some Italian language searches - nothing. Does not pass GNG IMHO. Missvain (talk) 00:58, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   16:40, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - despite the slight confusion over sources, there is no evidence here, or in searches or in a reasonably extensive library of recipe books that I have available that this was anything other than one author's personal recipe. There is nothing to indicate any notability or indeed, any significance. Just another recipe. Fails WP:GNG .  Velella  Velella Talk  20:51, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment Clearly I was wrong in my original assertion that this was a hoax, it does not appear to be a notable recipe however. Happy for the afc to be closed and article tagged for notability. Theroadislong (talk) 21:01, 15 May 2021 (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.