Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Whisky and Dining


 * 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 Speedy delete by Bearian as G7. (WP:NAC) Mark Arsten (talk) 23:14, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Whisky and Dining

 * – ( View AfD View log )

 Rahul Mothiya   (Talk2Me&#124;Contribs) 15:09, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Neutral What is the reason for deletion? I can see that it might be an essay, but what is your rationale?  Nate  • ( chatter ) 16:07, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Change to Speedy delete per Oknazevad with the reasonings cited in his rationale.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 23:11, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak delete The article seems to basically be unsourced original research to me, and not very well written at that. There are a couple of books listed as references - both simply entitled Whisky (without any mention of dining, and both published by the same publisher), but no indication of whether they actually discuss the subject of the article or what they may say about it. The article itself seems to state that the topic has not been a significant consideration in cultural history and has not been extensively discussed in literature ("no long-established tradition", etc.). —BarrelProof (talk) 16:52, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete – Pure OR, recreating an article (Whisky and Food) that was speedied as an unneeded fork of the main whisky article, where poorly written, poorly formatted attempts to force in the same OR have been reverted. The creator of those edits and the speedied page has been blocked for disruptive editting; I believe the creator of this article is also the same person (that is, a sock) based on the similarities of user names and contributions. As a recreation of a deleted page, with no improvement, this article should be itself speedied. Also, the user should be blocked for using a sock for block evasion, but that's outside the scope of this discussion. oknazevad (talk) 18:53, 3 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Low quality unsourced OR. Logical Cowboy (talk) 06:58, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:03, 5 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment. Author blanked the article and requested deletion on their edit summary . I've tagged it for G7 — Frankie (talk) 18:29, 6 March 2012 (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.