Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Traditional diet

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was no consensus, so keep. --Deathphoenix 05:50, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Traditional diet
Merge into Dieting. Says little more than its title. (I am sure I saw an article slightly worse than this discussed on VfD recently - what was its fate?) -- RWH 00:35, 2005 Feb 17 (UTC)
 * Merge to dieting. GRider\talk 00:47, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete and don't merge. I believe this is a bad definition. Traditional diets are usually contrasted with modern diets, not weight control diets. Kappa 01:25, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I tend to agree with Kappa that this article gives the wrong definition of a traditional diet. Zzyzx11 02:06, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. A rather circular dicdef. Trilobite (Talk) 10:36, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Also see 'definition, circular'. Delete. Radiant! 12:51, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I believe RHaworth is referring to Natural hairstyle which also seems to be on its merry way to delete, perhaps even speedy. I also agree with Kappa ... it is not a good definition IMO. HyperZonktalk 17:03, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Thank you, it was Natural hairstyle that I had in mind. RWH 18:00, 2005 Feb 17 (UTC)
 * Keep. Deletion doesn't seem entirely necessary; maybe some heavy editing and/or a merge.
 * You're right abou the research: I was in a bit of a hurry at the time and hoped that by giving an incomplete definition, I'd attract improvement. Weaselly, yes, but we all find ways.
 * Comment: I'm assuming the above is the originator of the article. Thank you for contributing to wikipedia, and I think we could have an article on this topic, but I don't think you did enough research first. If it gets deleted, maybe you could check out a few more google hits and then submit a new version (with references). Kappa 00:26, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect. -Sean Curtin 00:54, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. This article should be expanded. I have begun to do so. Burschik 15:25, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep (change of vote), expanded to usefulness. Kappa 16:11, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Looks relevant. 66.82.9.54 22:56, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep It seems relevant now, I will see if I can add any more.
 * Keep. Relevant enough to be encyclopedic. Carrp | Talk 06:42, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.