Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Working Fermentor + Freezer combinations


 * 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.  Sandstein  20:00, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Working Fermentor + Freezer combinations

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Contested PROD by which I endorsed, unencyclopedic original research. Wikipedia is not a how-to guide. § FreeRangeFrog croak 21:29, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Per nom. Amortias (T)(C) 21:32, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per above as original PROD'der. No references provided, and most likely sources of citations would be blog posts and other unreliable sources.  -- Finngall   talk  21:38, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

I would like the relevant editors to answer these questions:


 * 1) If references were provided for each row of my table, would that address the attribution / citation issue?
 * 2) If blog posters and other grass-roots sources are considered unreliable, then why is this not also a detriment to the likes of the list of Cryptids? The attribution for most of these examples is, by definition, unreliable. If I purport to see a flying pig this evening, and add that info to the Cryptids page, has Wikipedia grown its encyclopedic repository more reliably than adding a row to my table does? Where is the line drawn?
 * 3) If Wikipedia is not a How-To guide, how does one explain pages like Tequila_Sour?
 * 4) The examples in my table (a given combination of freezer + fermentor) are not easily reproduced in vacuo, but are meant to be 100% reproducible from these sources. Does that not constitute a form of encyclopedic knowledge?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielbcook (talk • contribs) 22:39, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:06, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:06, 9 April 2015 (UTC)


 * I'll ignore WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS for a moment. 1) No, we don't like lists of "things" that don't exist elsewhere in the encyclopedia and are essentially just a bunch of external links, even if they are presented as citations. 2) The list of Cryptids is a list of articles, not a list of things that don't exist in the encyclopedia. If one of them is sourced to blogs as you say then it should be nominated for deletion and removed from that list. In the meantime, anyone is free to non-controversially remove redlinks and non-linked entries from there. 3) Thanks for pointing that out, I fixed it. 4) I suppose that's for this discussion to decide. § FreeRangeFrog croak 00:07, 9 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Sorry, in my #1 I didn't mean to use "references" as defined by a link off-site to a more official repository of the same information. What I meant was: would it address your concerns if each row of the table is marked as having been contributed by a specific person? The collection of information represented by the table doesn't exist anywhere else, to my knowledge, for if this information did already exist in one place then I wouldn't be attempting to create the page.


 * I will borrow directly from the article Wikipedia is Not a How-to Guide, under the heading "1. Instruction manuals", "Describing to the reader how people or things use or do something is encyclopedic...". This proposed table is nothing more than a description of how people (i.e., home brewers) do something (i.e., successfully combine a fermentor and a cooling chamber). Take for example the Stout 40-gallon fermentor, which will fit into a small # of commercially-available freezers, making it of high value to learn a priori that a given freezer is proven to fit this fermentor before shelling out $1300+ for it and then discovering that all your efforts to find a home for it will fail (unless you happen to find a local Craigslist ad for one of the three late-model units it works in).


 * Delete per nom.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 09:53, 16 April 2015 (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.