Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of countries by coffee consumption per capita

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. Nobody wants to keep it. Sandstein 15:14, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

List of countries by coffee consumption per capita[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article should be deleted since:

data is not encyclopaedic in nature
data does not cover enough countries to give a balanced global picture
data is not kept regularly
article relies on only one source
source is not 100% verifiable

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Anthony F. Camilleri (talk • contribs) 07:39, 31 March 2015‎ (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Discussion page was created without afd2 template or transclusion to daily log. Fixed now--no comment on the nomination itself. --Finngall ^talk 14:00, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Dai Pritchard (talk) 14:34, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:18, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Very Weak Delete Reasons given for deletion are poor: to the creator of the AfD, I'd recommend reading WP:ATA. However, the article in its current state is poor: I'm not sure the one reference is enough to support the article. Pishcal — ♣ 16:37, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm typically cautious about outright deletion of any article or section thereof; as I usually try to be supportive, proactive and encourage others to try harder (as I want to be treated myself). After all, a contribution may have good faith, even if it needs citation verification and improvements. Usually when I have an issue, I quickly look the topic up myself and add citations, or make recommendations thereof. Not everyone wants that burden, but its courteous and helpful. The other side of this conundrum is the burden of lost research and contributions that are now out of site and out of mind. And that's ever more harder to recover. So, at least, I suggest merging the work somewhere else. In short, I think we may delete an article, but not the idea itself (unless it's absurd or such). Ca.papavero (talk) 20:04, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk: I've never used one of these page devices re. deletion. I put my comment at the Talk section, not here. What's proper?Ca.papavero (talk) 18:12, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Any comments related to this discussion belong on this page, and not on the article talk page or anybody else's user talk page. Pishcal — ♣ 22:06, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

His comments are on the talk page of this page, but yes, they should have gone here. --Finngall ^talk 22:23, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I honesty forgot that AfD pages even had talk pages. Pishcal — ♣ 23:12, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lol…okay thanks for the help!Ca.papavero (talk) 06:54, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Along with my other comment on this talk page, also consider the other places where coffee consumption is discussed. First, there's no section in the article of Coffee itself that's dedicated to consumption, although the topic is interspersed therein. Why would that article include sections for "Cultivation" and "Production" and yet direct to a new page for a discussion about "Consumption." By the way, consumption is not the same as "Sale and distribution." Another article, Economics of coffee, does include a section about Consumption, but starts off with a discussion about " World production." These articles are not developed and corresponding themselves, aside from splintering off to make a dedicated article that's exclusively for "per capita" consumption. Ca.papavero (talk) 19:38, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Referenced only to a blog, which does not itself give a reference to anywhere else: Noyster (talk), 12:07, 3 May 2015 (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.