Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scores on the doors

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 redirect to Food safety#Regulations by jurisdiction and agency. Clear consensus to redirect, but the ideal target isn't quite as clear. The Food safety article was the most mentioned; if there is disagreement about this, it can be worked out through normal editor discussion or at WP:RFD. RL0919 (talk) 19:05, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Scores on the doors

[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)

Currently this is based only on primary sources from government websites, and may be WP:SYNTH. I can find attestation to the term, e.g. [1], but otherwise WP:GNG is questionable. Created by a COI SPA who repeatedly shoehorned a commercial website into the article text; see also Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Scores_on_the_doors. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 08:49, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Health and fitness, and Law. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 08:49, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 08:51, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 08:57, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep It is definitely getting some independent coverage though none of it seems to be in top tier publications. For example:

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/hull-east-yorkshire-news/scores-doors-rating-scheme-aims-7744837

https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/21169044.scores-doors-latest-food-hygiene-results-oxfordshire/

https://www.westerntelegraph.co.uk/news/23056831.five-star-rating-farm-shop-food-hygiene-rating/

Chagropango (talk) 09:55, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to food hygiene article. This is basically displaying results of public health inspections in a window. Oaktree b (talk) 15:27, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to food safety. Explanation of the food hygiene ratings schemes should be placed in the appropriate country's section of that article. Rupples (talk) 03:56, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:48, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merge content and redirect into Restaurant rating#Sanitation, where that section could use much more fill-in than just Amerocentrism. Nate • (chatter) 23:03, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:42, 3 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Food safety#Regulations by jurisdiction and agency. The article's subject is not notable enough for a stand-alone article. Nythar (💬-❄️) 06:13, 9 December 2022 (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.