Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Food trends

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:20, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Food trends[edit]

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

Personal essay, original research. WP:PROD tag removed without explanation. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:12, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am also adding the following page to this discussion - it's almost a word-for-word copy of Food trends:

Yunshui 雲‍水 13:38, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOTESSAY. This article seems to just be a personal essay composed entirely of Original Research. Rorshacma (talk) 22:48, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 16:04, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 16:04, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I agree that this reads like a personal essay. A quick browse of hits in Google News reveals a plethora of reliably sourced articles about national food trends from cupcakes to sweet potatoes, as well as articles noting a number of yearly trends.1234 Perhaps the least bitey solution is to userfy the article so the creator can work it into a more encyclopedic article in their sandbox with some help from friendly mentors. As it stands now, it should be removed from view as unencyclopedic. Geoff ^{Who, me?} 21:52, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment It wasn't apparent from the article, which has no active Talk page, but I've found this article is part of an active student project. Not that its status as such makes anything different about evaluating the article for inclusion or deletion, but it's instructive to know what is going on. Plaudits to those who are trying to teach and develop new Wikipedians. Geoff ^{Who, me?} 22:59, 17 April 2012 (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.