Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Falesco

Comparison between Cristom and Falesco
Mostly offtopic conversation moved here Response Agne, I certainly respect your expertise on wine and didn't mean to offend you with my Google wisecrack, so I have struck it. I didn't intend that the quotations I mentioned above be added wholesale to the article - I brought them to the discussion to indicate that reliable sources discuss Falesco in much more detail than routine tasting notes. I assumed from your remarks that you are a real stickler for the highest quality of sourcing in wine related articles, so to learn more about such high standards, I read an article you edited extensively which is listed on your user page, Cristom Vineyards, which was featured in DYK on January 28, 2011. What I saw as references surprised me. After all, you compared the possible references that I had suggested to Yelp, a website of user submitted reviews. The Cristom article references WineGeek.com ten times, which is a website of user submitted reviews, and therefore not a reliable source. Then, there are nine citations to Avalon Wine, a commercial online wine sales site, and accordingly not a reliable source. The website of the International Pinot Noir Celebration, an annual promotional festival, is cited twice. We've got Prince of Pinot, a retired ophalmologist who blogs about Pinot Noir. We've got Winesnw.com, a blog that promotes the wines of the Pacific Northwest. None of these are are reliable sources. Surely, some of the references are better, for example, the articles by Nick Passmore. But then, he's not a notable wine critic is he, but just a guy who writes wine articles for business magazines? Somewhere on the same level as Gil Lempert-Schwarz of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, perhaps? But then, Lempert-Schwarz is chairman of The Wine Institute of Las Vegas, so maybe he knows a thing or two. It seems that you are strict about sources when you have decided that a winery article should be deleted, but not so strict about sources when you want a winery article that you have expanded to be featured on DYK. Please explain where I have misunderstood, because you know much more about wine than I do. Thank you. Cullen328 (talk) 14:26, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * If you check the article history, Agne did only very minor work on the Cristom article and it is not fair to blame these problems on her. I would write a response to some of the points raised, but it would surely be best to stick to the subject at hand in this AfD as I cannot see how the above helps the discussion. Camw (talk) 14:36, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Agne said: "Articles that I have contributed to either by creation, expansion or nomination." Feel free to take the discussion to my talk page. Enough said here. Cullen328 (talk) 14:59, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Well this is a bit off topic (ala WP:OTHERSTUFFEXIST) but, yes, I did nominate Cristom for DYK after Camw created. However I don't think the two situations are similar at all. There is far more WP:SIGCOV on sources for Cristom than there is for Falesco that extend beyond tasting notes. The Business Week and Forbes articles alone are exclusively devoted to detail coverage. And several of the cites attributed to "lower status" sources (like Wine Geeks, etc) could have just as easily been pulled from one of those or even other sources (If I took a more substantial editing role in the article, I would have used Jim Gordon's Opus Vino and Andre Domine's Wine texts for a few cites). But the point is, there IS material available to write a full developed, well referenced article on Cristom because it has been the subject of WP:SIGCOV and we have much more than just tasting notes and sales brochure material. Show me the type of significant coverage for Falesco like the Forbes and Business Week articles on Cristom, then I will gladly withdraw this nomination. But there is a reason why this article has sat pretty much in its same sorry state for 3+ years, even after it was prodded 2 years ago. It is because the type of "meat on the bones" material that comes from WP:SIGCOV in reliable sources is lacking for this winery. AgneCheese/Wine 21:48, 4 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Passmore's Forbes article is a set of tasting notes, pure and simple. The only thing he says about Cristom other than evaluating their wines is that they do a very good job of growing Pinot Noir. An unimpressive source, in my opinion. His Business Week article is only slightly better.  The San Francisco Chronicle article mentions Cristom a few times in passing but is not in-depth coverage.  As for WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, I was not selecting a mediocre article from among the 3.5 million articles on Wikipedia, instead I was analyzing the reliability of the sources in an article among a list of 18 articles on your own user page, which you state you've helped shepherd through DYK in 2011.  Please be reminded that WP:DYK says that "nominations should be rejected if a short inspection reveals that they are not based on reliable sources".  The Cristom article is packed full of unreliable sources.  Calling WineGeeks a "lower status" source is like trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.  It's a user-edited blog review site, and is unacceptable on Wikipedia, though I am sure it is fine for wine enthusiasts who find it elsewhere.  And Avalon Wine, an online wine dealer?  Please. Perhaps you and Camw can delete those sources and substitute reliable ones. Thank you. Cullen328 (talk) 02:42, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I find it very curious that you're approach to defending Falesco is not to edit the article and prove that a worthwhile, non-WP:ADVERT, non-WP:WINEGUIDE, encyclopedic entry can be produced from available reliable sources. (According to you, this should be easy via "normal editing" but the lack of progress this article has exhibited over 3+ years shows that is likely just smoke and mirrors) Instead, you are taking purely a WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS approach in attacking the article of an editor (User:Camw) who was largely sympathetic to your view, merely because I had a minor, tangible involvement in the article. I'm not sure how many AfD you've participated in but attacking the nominator is also not How to save an article proposed for deletion. If you truly feel that Cristom is a terrible article then please, nominate it for deletion, challenge any particular statement or source in the article with clean up tags or even WP:SOFIXIT. I stand by my position that there is enough evidence of WP:SIGCOV for Cristom to firmly establish its notability (even if all available WP:RS, such as some of the offline sources I own, were not used in the article). If you or any other editor is able to craft 4000+ byte, fully developed article on Falesco, I will be pleasantly surprised. But I strongly suspect that after the smoke and mirrors of this AfD fades and the article is kept, it will STILL be in the same sorry shape for many more years.  AgneCheese/Wine 17:43, 5 March 2011 (UTC)