Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peppermint tea

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 of the debate was keep --Ichiro 05:34, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Peppermint tea

This article is not required for research purposes - how to make a cup of tea is already covered in Tea. -- (aeropagitica) 17:24, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

I disagree, the article is informative. And researchers can see that it helps lessen the effects of digestory tract problems. And when it comes to how it is made, I only included it because it differs from normal tea making procedures. Regards.

Delete. Wikipedia is not a cookbook. Ifnord 18:06, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with peppermint and redirect. The peppermint article itself is rather stubby for an important plant, and claims about the alleged medicinal properties of peppermint belong there also. Reference Euell Gibbons or Nicholas Culpeper or something. Not sure if the business about the Quaker youth group belongs. Smerdis of Tlön 19:38, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. We have 129 articles in Category:tea and nom makes no effort to show why this is different. Next time perhaps leave more than five minutes for editing and we would have a better article. -- JJay 20:00, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. Peppermint tea is a distinct and different type of tea and therefore requires its own article. Since it does not even contain traditional tea leaves (Camellia sinensis) it would be misleading to merge it with the article Tea. Perhaps a short reference in the articles on Tea and Peppermint, linking to the Peppermint tea entry may be required. As for Wikipedia not being a cookbook, fair enough, but I doubt many people would need to look up the article to find out how to brew tea, and it's not a secret recipe or method. The reference to the Quaker Youth Group enhances the article by conveying the connotations Peppermint Tea holds for certain people, if others know of similar groups or perhaps famous people who are renowned for their association with/love of said drink they could be added to the article. Joe Thwaites 00:23, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per JJay. Is there no way to protect articles from nomination for, say, 24 hours after creation?? At least that way enough time has elapsed that the originating editor should be able to create the basis of an article, and we'd have something to vote on!. Jcuk 01:13, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- as per JJay. -- Geo Swan 01:16, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Can merge information into Tea or Peppermint if neccessary. --Daveb 02:31, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep/Edit - Keep the page but remove the "how to make tea with a teabag" aspect - replace it with "how to make tea with pepermint leaves... Fosnez 08:41, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I have done a few edits on it. I can see a case for merging it into peppermint ; however, peppermint tea as such is suggested as a remedy for various illnesses. It is actually different from tea proper, and so it does not belong in the tea article, other than as a "See also". Logophile 11:00, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. This article would have no significance if it were to be placed in the tea section. The second edit makes it look more like an authentic wikipedia entry... thispersonis 22:58, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but the "Acquisition and Preparation" section is too much like a recipe. -- jaredwf 08:18, 5 January 2006 (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.