Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nantong Xiting Cracker

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 no consensus. Probably needs attention by Chinese-speaking editors. Sandstein 07:49, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nantong Xiting Cracker[edit]

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

everything here appears to be legendary, and part of the promotion of the company now making the cracker--whose name is not mentioned. DGG ( talk ) 03:30, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Mark the train^Discuss 06:10, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Mark the train^Discuss 06:10, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Xiting is a small part of Nantong: [1]. The native term for the crisp seems to be either 南通脆饼 or 西亭脆饼. The first one is machine-translated to Nantong crisp and the second to Xiting cracker. They look very similar, so it's hard to understand whether they are the same thing or not. Adding to confusion is the fact that our article pretty much calls it by both names. The first term brought results from as far back as 2007: [2], [3], [4], [5] and [6]. Searching for Nantong Xiting also brought up an English article from Xinhua: [7]. The cracker seems to exist as a cultural thing in the region and multiple companies seem to produce them: [8]. But I don't know what the coverage requirements for crispbread Wikipedia articles are. Mr. Magoo (talk) 17:40, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If it is nndeed produced by multiple companies, all it needs is some rewriting to indicate this and decrease the apparent promotionalism . DGG ( talk ) 02:04, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I cut out the company mention entirely. And to begin with I think it was simply poor English. I don't think they were specifically referring to a single company. Chinese usually doesn't "have" plural. They have an extra symbol for plural but it's rarely used. Because of that when they write in English implied plural sometimes become singular. This means company might've supposed to have been companies. The sentence also focused more on the extra flavors. But looking at the sales listings on their Amazon-like sites, I don't think I even saw any extra flavors.

I also edited the grammar and removed some section headings. I also added the few sources. Mr. Magoo (talk) 14:41, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:55, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

delete Here's the problem: articles which are entirely based on foreign sources sometimes are workable for things with proper names, but in this case, from what I can see, we're just making up a name for something. If it becomes well-known enough to English speakers that it gets an English name, then OK, but at the moment the name of the thing is an insurmountable mountain of WP:OR. Mangoe (talk) 15:22, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like you're talking about a WP:NAME issue, which really isn't a rationale for deletion. To add, if a subject is notable in another language it is notable for all language editions of Wikipedia (see also WP:NONENG). If there is no common English name then just revert to the pinyin transcription. _dk (talk) 17:26, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No. There needs to be more proof that there even is a thing than that someone can transliterate a phrase. Mangoe (talk) 19:14, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of Chinese speakers editing on English Wikipedia if you need verification. _dk (talk) 20:06, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How are Chinese speakers relevant to reference to the transliterated name? It's not our job to assign English names to Chinese things. Mangoe (talk) 21:25, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your argument boils down to "We don't have an English name on this so we should not have an article", which I hope you can see is not a very effective argument to make. _dk (talk) 22:22, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, no, my argument is that "since there is no English word for this, it's not our place to be making one up for it, and therefore we shouldn't have an article on it." If you want to argue that we should be making a name up for it, or that we aren't making up a name for it, well, OK (though I disagree on both points), but otherwise, you're simply making a WP:ILIKEIT response. Mangoe (talk) 22:26, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We have a guideline dealing with this specific issue at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese), which I like very much indeed. _dk (talk) 22:37, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, actually, we don't. The guideline you cite is entirely concerned with proper names. Without regard to my opinion on how well we create English versions of those names, it's not the same thing as this. Mangoe (talk) 11:15, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, A Train^talk 11:11, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Appears to be notable. Possibly rename as it appears to be a type of regional sesame seed snack along the lines of Huangqiao Sesame Cake and Changzhou Sesame Cake e.g. 1--Pontificalibus (talk) 16:36, 22 October 2017 (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.