Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Food craving
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Logan Talk Contributions 05:29, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Food craving[edit]
- Food craving (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Dangerous unsourced article about dubious medical concepts. Damiens.rf 14:26, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep As the google scholar and google book searches show, this is a highly notable concept, even if it's definitely a crap wikipedia article at the moment. I think it's just that nobody wants to do the work. (Maybe because it always makes potential improvers think of something they'd rather be eating, instead? I know I could go for some pizza right now.) Yakushima (talk) 16:32, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: WP:LAZY says nothing about deleting an article due to not feeling like working on it.AerobicFox (talk) 23:18, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:14, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:14, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep This is a classic stub article (for now). It is a topic worthy of expansion.Novangelis (talk) 15:02, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep A good stub that merits expansion. Plenty of source material, clearly a basic encyclopedic topic. I'm surprised we didn't have an article until now. Steven Walling 22:08, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Notable topic. I was wondering why bulimia was not mentioned. Nageh (talk) 22:38, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.