Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Super chef

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 merge with Celebrity chef. Angr/talk 23:01, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Super chef

Article is primarily an advertisement for the book Super Chef. Also, the term "super chef" as defined here is something of a neologism and hasn't caught on beyond Rossant's book; the phrase is generic and is usually used as a synonym for celebrity chef. Klaw ¡digame! 03:00, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

• Merge with celebrity chef perhaps?
• Delete this page serves no purpose. Maybe we do need a neologism to label this exact sub-sub-species of people but I doubt it and certainly not in this book-pushing form. Celebrity chef is fine for now, at most merge to that and label as a little used / suggested neologism. Deiz 19:39, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete and redirect to celebrity chef. Might be worth a brief mention in that article, but otherwise is a neologism, apparently unused by anyone other than Rossant (who isn't even notable enough to have an article herself). Powers 21:31, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
• Leave as a separate page. I am the author of this page (and I am not Juliette Rossant!).

Were any of you to read this entire "super chef" before continuing your deletion process, you will see that a "super chef" is clearly a new (though growing) phenomenon among chefs -- and clearly does not include many celebrity and other chefs. In fact, the article spends its last quarter separating out celebrity and other chefs who might be confused with super chefs: Julia Child, James Beard, Jacques Pepin, Sara Moulton, Anthony Bourdain, Alton Brown, and Rocco DiSpirito; Paul Prudhomme, Alice Waters, Martin Yan, Michael Chiarello, and Masaharu Morimoto; Rachael Ray, Paula Deen, and Jeffrey Smith (AKA The Frugal Gourmet).

If you wish to make changes, e.g., you don't like the book reference (strange for people who are trying to creating a reference encyclopedia), then please suggest or simply make changes, but at least have the courtesy of reading more carefully.

Also, the "sub-sub-category" and little used "neo-logism" arguments are not very strong, either: isn't Wikipedia as an online encyclopedia trying to get ahead of the institutional speed of something like Brittanica?

Lastly, if you want an article about Juliette Rossant in order to validate your point, I am writing one today.

That said, I confess that Wikipedia still confuses me with its own institutional, lengthy instructions. I am trying to categorized this page (preferably under Food, Hospitality, Business, News, Media, Celebrity and/or possibly other categories, if I can just find them and figure out how to incorporate them...)

Also, I am unclear about hyperlinks: does Wikipedia prefer hyperlinks referring to its own pages or outside pages? Frankly, I am for both and don't mind adding both. Thus, " Juliette Rossant q.v. "

Please email me directly with replies before taking any further action, as this will also help me understand Wikipedia's direction and how worthwhile it is for me to contributing with further new additions and edits: aboudaqn [ at ] gmail [dot] com.

Thank you.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aboudaqn (talk • contribs) .

Speaking for myself, I did indeed read the article. I'm well aware of the distinction Rossant is making. However, we can't have an article on every new word someone comes up with. We need some evidence of its currency and usage beyond the confines of this one book. We're not in a competition with Britannica (or any other encyclopedia) to see who can incorporate neologisms first. Right now, if this term belongs anywhere, it's in a section of the celebrity chef (or possibly chef) article, because it's not well-known or widely-used enough to have its own article. Someday it might be, but today, based on available evidence, it isn't. Also, please understand that this isn't anything personal; it's about making the best encyclopedia we can. Powers 01:34, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Response to that little tirade is here. Deizio 01:44, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

• Merge with celebrity chef. --Terence Ong 13:20, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

• Redirect to celebrity chef. Now an ad for a book that tries to define a fairly common phrase in a certain way; no evidence this particular definition is notable, much less the definition. Apart from book ad contains lists of chef names already covered in celebrity chef. Weregerbil 13:26, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
• Merge to celebrity chef. - Rynne 18:21, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

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.