Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wine Philosophy

 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 delete. Joyous 02:14, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)

Wine Philosophy
Otherwise inoffensive essay, but still a statement of unattributed POV. (One unmentioned POV might be that wine should contain a high percentage of alcohol.) No article links to this, so I have no clue why we even need the subject. -- llywrch 19:27, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete, It's no use now but with better words it might worked. Inter 19:58, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - it looks like an advert for the external link to me. CDC   (talk)  20:44, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. POV isn't a deletion criterion (although this is pretty POV; no sentence in a Wikipedia article should have "should" or "ought" as its main verb) but this looks to me like original research and possibly subtle advertising. Also, I'm still not sure exactly how the material relates to the title. If wine connoisseurs' Weltanschauungs really have certain distinctive characteristics, I would not be opposed to an article describing that, but that doesn't seem to be the intention of this article. &mdash; &#1051;&#1080;&#1074;&#1072;&#1081; | &#x263a; 20:50, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Useless. What's next, Car philosophy, Toothpaste philosophy? Junes 00:53, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Clear delete. Josh Cherry 20:37, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. As a "New World" imbiber, I know all too well this is bollocks.  Edeans 00:23, 6 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.