Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Popeye's Chicken Sandwich

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 merge to Popeyes. Does not yet have long-term notability to justify a separate article that is WP:NOTNEWS, but the content is relevant in the article about the company. RL0919 (talk) 02:02, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Popeye's Chicken Sandwich[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

I am not convinced that this sandwich merits its own Wikipedia article. Yes it's got a lot of coverage right now, but it's doubtful that will last. I suggest putting the gist of the info in the Popeyes article and redirect. ... discospinster _talk 13:31, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:42, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I would like to disclose that I am the creator of the page. I believe the sandwich deserves its own page because of several reasons. The sandwich is Popeye's flagship sandwich so its nutritional information should be available, the amount of coverage the sandwich is receiving and will continue to receive outpaces virtually any other fast food item in history, the marketing behind the sandwich in notable and the nutritional information should be available. Lets face it, the sandwich will eventually get its own page. THe discussion will likely be more about whether it happens now or we delete my version and someone makes one a few months from now. I think with the ongoing coverage there is likely going to be a lot more to add to this story. Plus there are a lot of news items which are happening that center around the sandwich which could be added to the page. The sandwich is looking to be one of the biggest ongoing coverage episodes of 2019. Plus many are voting it the best chicken sandwich in fast food. I definitely think the sandwich deserves a page. If in a 6 months or a year from now if the sandwich's page doesn't improve and this was just a singular viral campaign then perhaps it should be noinated but at this point I think coverage will continue to spiral and there will be more noteworthy events to attach to the page. ScienceAdvisor (talk) 14:32, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would like to add that the sandwich seems to have picked up by every media outlet that Wikipedia considers credible including the NY Times, Wash Post, Fox, ABC, NBC, CBS, Yahoo, CNBC, CNN, USA TOday and virtually every local paper too. I'm not going to be floored either way but this sandwich definitely meets the criteria for it's own page. ScienceAdvisor (talk) 15:08, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. While there are pages on specific fast-food chain burgers, this one is new and it is too early to say if it is significant. The essential details could be added to the Products section of the Popeyes page. asnac (talk) 15:24, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Here today, gone tomorrow--not the sandwich, but the coverage. Merge and redirect. Drmies (talk) 17:27, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect Primarily per WP:NOTNEWS, but also because it's not really the sandwich itself which appears to have generated most of the coverage - from what I've read, most of the coverage seems to be about the success of the company's viral marketing campaign, and its rivalry with another firm. I feel that this would be better contextualised within the article on the Popeyes, rather than in a separate article about the sandwich, which does not appear notable to me in and of itself. I don't think we want too much of this content merging into the main article, which already covers this briefly with good sources; it could perhaps be expanded upon a little, but we don't need the trivia in there. I'll note that there is currently a typo in the position of the apostrophe in the title, which should either be after the s, or omitted altogether (I guess we could have redirects from all three, as plausible search terms). GirthSummit_(blether) 17:39, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- I realise this isn't an argument for deletion, but just wanted to add in response to the author's claims above about this being one of the biggest stories of 2019, that I had literally never heard of this sandwich before I reviewed this article. I realise that I live in the UK, but I just got back from a three-week vacation in California, having managed to remain entirely oblivious of its existence while I was there. I'm not saying that it hasn't been in the news, but to say it's one of the biggest stories of 2019 is overstating the case. GirthSummit _(blether) 17:50, 27 August 2019 (UTC) [reply]
  - adding my input as an American who watches plenty of TV and reads the news, I've only really seen memes about it on reddit or facebook but nothing much more.CodeLyoko^buzz 18:08, 27 August 2019 (UTC) [reply]
  - Girth Summit I would do a search on Popeye's Chicken Sandwich on the USA Google News to see all the coverage. People are crawling through the drive through windows and the sandwiches are going for up to $4k on Ebay. There are a lot of news stories surrounding the item. Ultimately I think this is more of WP:TooSoon that a WP:NotTheNews issue. This is going to be their flagship sandwich, the item isn't going anywhere for probably a couple of decades and I think it will only be a couple of days before someone likely gets shot for one of these sandwiches. Again this article is guaranteed to be published again in the near future. This is just taking it down and making someone rewrite the article again sometime soon.ScienceAdvisor (talk) 20:41, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    - Remember ScienceAdvisor that there is an active viral marketing campaign going on. We have a duty not to be taken in by their nonsense. It's very easy to set up an eBay account, bid $4000 bucks for one of these, screendump the image of the successful bid and put it on Instagram - instant story, journalist Mr Phil Space gets to go home early. Show me a respectable RS, that has actually checked, the facts and that seriously asserts that money like that has changed hands between two people unrelated with the campaign. GirthSummit_(blether) 22:51, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      - GirthSummit _(blether) I dont really care but I did check ebay and there are a number of them that sold from sellers who have been long time ebay members. Several in the $500 - $5k range. ScienceAdvisor (talk) 02:43, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
        That would be trivially easy to manipulate. Again, show me a proper reliable source that has checked any of those out and reports that it ever actually happened. GirthSummit _(blether) 06:03, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
        GirthSummit _(blether) If you google Popeyes Chicken Sandwich google returns 78.5 million hits for a sandwich that has been out two weeks. That is more than WP:NotNews. ScienceAdvisor (talk) 13:54, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
        ScienceAdvisor, 'Donald Trump's Hair' = 546 million hits. Article? No, it can be adequately covered, with appropriate context, at the main article. This sandwich is not significant, but the marketing campaign launched by the company probably is, which is why dealing with it at the main article is a better approach. GirthSummit _(blether) 14:12, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
        GirthSummit _(blether) It's notable. It will likely be in the top two for every rating of chicken sandwiches for at least the next few years. With every news source conducting their own poll at this point the sandwich is pretty much guaranteed to be notable, even if you dont think there has been enough sustained coverage yet. The item is certainly heading that way. When you sell out of a sandwich and every news source in the country covers it, the item is notable. Even if it is notable for being a trend. ScienceAdvisor (talk) 14:19, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and Redirect to Popeyes as per WP:NOTNEWS CodeLyoko^buzz 17:45, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and merge This reminds me of the infamous Boondocks episode. Do Patti LaBelle’s pies have an article? Remember that? People acting like they’ve never eaten before. Trillfendi (talk) 18:07, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Obviously I really don't have much stake in this because this is a "just for fun" article I created.. but several other sandwiches like the Whopper and Big Mac have their own pages and havent had this type of PR push. They have been around significantly longer but this will likely be Popeye's version of those sandwiches. Honestly I think there will be a number of incidents in the news regarding this sandwich where people get arrested. I think we should wait a month before deciding to merge to see what can be added.ScienceAdvisor (talk) 19:38, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Honestly, I don't think so. Right now the hype around it is almost certainly fleeting, as was with the whole "IHOP is now IHOB" and we don't have an article about that, its just a redirect to the main IHOP page. I think in this instance we should just merge into the main Popeyes page and if in the future the sandwich gains enough coverage to warrant an article it can be rewritten at that time. Also per your comments about the Whopper and Big Mac, see WP:OTHER.CodeLyoko^buzz 23:02, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect Per WP:NOTNEWS; not enough independent, lasting notability to merit a standalone article. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:57, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
comment I would like to say that I went to WP:NOTNEWS and if you read it correctly it states that newsworthy events should not be included. This is not a newsworthy event. This is an item that is receiving a lot of coverage. Hence from my interpretation WP:NOTNEWS wouldn't be relevant and you should look at the sandwich as an item that is receiving news coverage. Also given each of these franchises are going to reply with new offerings and the amount of taste tests that will be done over the Great Chicken Sandwich wars that are to come, this will be in the news for quite some time. ScienceAdvisor (talk) 02:47, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Your repeated personal predictions of the future have zero basis in Wikipedia:deletion policy. Only a policy-based rationale will hold water here. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Uncle G (talk) 09:18, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - Uncle G In that case the article has the notability, 3rd party press sources, and plenty of reviews which would qualify it for an article. By every means in which we would rate every other category or item for an article this article qualifies. Virtually every painting by every Rennaissance master seems to qualify for an article even though many of them receive little to no press coverage. If notability is WP:NotInherited then that shouldn't be wikipedia's policy but it is. The subject has had ongoing national attention every day for nearly a month. The press coverage has resulted in thousands of 3rd party articles covering everything from the ingredients, marketing, availability, and consumer base. Every one of these delete and merge votes is based on a "prediction" which as you said is not wikipedia policy. What are your thoughts on that? ScienceAdvisor (talk) 14:37, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    - The problem with that response is your inclusion of the word "press". Academic books and articles, where you will find plenty of coverage of paintings by Renaissance masters, count for a lot more than ephemeral coverage in newspapers. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:51, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
comment Just one more thing.. this page is getting 250 views a day so there is some reason for it to exist. I know this page is heading to a merge from the voting but for some reason unbeknownst to me that decision is irritating me.. Perhaps cause I know the page will be recreated by someone else.. lol ScienceAdvisor (talk) 15:18, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and merge. I know that Chick-fil-A got drawn into the culture wars and the mainstream news which leans left is not favorable towards Christian owned Chick-fil-A. I have not tasted the Popeye chicken sandwich, but I suspect the free publicity will go away just like it did for some of the Democratic presidential candidates that the press used to highlight. In other words, I suspect this sandwich is the "Beto O'Rourke and Pete Buttigieg of chicken sandwiches". In all likelihood, the free publicity does not come from love of Popeye's chicken sandwich, but antipathy towards Chick-fil-A. I think it is a media created sensation that is a flash in the pan. The media will tire of this shiny new toy just like they have done with Beto O'Rourke and Pete Buttigieg. Chick-Fila-A's chicken sandwich doesn't have its own entry and I am sure I could find plenty articles about its sandwiches. At a bare minumum, this is a case of Wikipedia:Too soon. The sandwich doesn't have the name recognition of the Whopper/Big Mac.Knox490 (talk) 20:53, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- None of that rationale has any relation to Wikipedia:deletion policy. Only a policy-based rationale will hold water here. Notability is not subjective. Uncle G (talk) 09:18, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sandwich is certainly generating enough coverage to merit its own article. It was launched earlier this month, and it is still generating coverage today, 18 days later. Yes, the lawsuit is absolutely frivolous, but the fact that a WP:RS is reporting such a frivolous lawsuit means that that the sandwich meets notability. The only reason to merge to Popeye's would be if there is no reason to believe that the article could not be developed beyond a stub. I don't think that's the case. Given that the template for the sandwich already has partial nutritional information, and I expect it to be completely filled out over time, I don't see how this nutritional information would fit in the Popeye's article. Banana Republic (talk) 04:07, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18 days later! Wow! That must be nearly a lifetime to some of the participants here. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:48, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Popeyes. It is well researched and nearly all the information could be a major improvement to the main article as the most notable product. If the sandwich continues to receive substantial coverage to become a globally ubiquitous term in the vein of Big Mac, then a move to standalone would make sense.Burroughs'10 (talk) 05:00, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the nutritional information can be included in the main page as Banana Republic mentioned. Plus within the last 24 hrs someone tried to use a gun to break into a Popeyes to get one of the sold-out sandwiches. ScienceAdvisor (talk) 18:36, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merge seems more reasonable. The content shold stay but not as an article on its own. Ktrimi991 (talk) 00:15, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Popeyes, WP:ATD Wm335td (talk) 19:35, 4 September 2019 (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.