Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Apple picking
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 no consensus, default to keep. Prodego talk 23:32, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Apple picking
This doesn't seem right in an encyclopedia. To rephrase the article: people pick apples for recreation, but also to get apples from the tree to buy. I don't think so. --Montchav 18:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC) Montchav 18:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. I merged the tiny bit of information in this article into Apple. LastChanceToBe 01:04, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 12:24, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Doesn't need it's own article. Betaeleven 14:38, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- Comment I'm unsure about this one. Maybe we could merge it with some article on picking/harvesting?--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 16:05, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- Keep - the current article is essentially an unreferenced stub, but I imagine that there is room for expansion, and referencing available. For example, a quick google search without much thought or effort produced this article from the Chicago sun-Times. It may be a fluff piece, but it does represent a reliable source, and the focus of the article is on apple-picking as recreation. I've added the reference into the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Whpq (talk • contribs) 16:45, March 14, 2007 (UTC)
-
- Comment - and with a bit more looking, I've added a Slate article. -- Whpq 17:24, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. Passes WP:ATT now. ≈≈Carolfrog≈≈♦тос♦ 10:01, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
- Keep per the coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources (added after AFD began). Of course this doesn't justify creating articles on "X picking" for all fruits unless that particular activity has been the subject of multiple reliable, independent sources. -- Black Falcon 22:36, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Not notable in Wiki sense. Is it an abuse of "Assume Good Faith" to imagine I hear tongues slightly in cheeks above? Springnuts 23:31, 19 March 2007 (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.
