Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chinese take-out boxes

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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was DELETE. — JIP | Talk 16:29, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Chinese take-out boxes

Trivia. Chinese take-out article. RoySmith 18:55, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, this is the embodiment of OR. - ulayiti (talk) 18:57, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete if not turned into a real article by the time listing expires. If improved into a real article, then keep. --Jiang 21:36, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. My reason is that the article has been requested in Wikipedia:Requested articles/Culture and fine arts, I was abstaining until I found out that. --Vsion 21:41, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

  Gulp. Just because somebody requested it doesn't mean it's worthy of inclusion in the encyclopedia. What if I requested Elbonian toenail clippings and somebody wrote an article about that? --RoySmith 22:16, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

  Do Elbonian toenail clippings have anything to do with Culture and fine arts? -- Vsion 22:25, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

  I've seen some pretty strange things that were called art :-) --RoySmith 00:16, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

  The article may be requested, but I'd be willing to bet that the person requesting the article was hoping for a much better article than this one. Crypticfirefly 06:11, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Ouch. Pilatus 22:38, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. While an article on takeout boxes might have merit, this article, as written, is useless. - Sensor 00:30, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

  Indeed. It doesn't even mention those clever fold-up waxed cardboard boxes with the wire handles which in my mind are the canonical Chinese take-out containers. What is interesting is that the title of the article refers to "take-out" which is American usage, but the body of the article says "take-away", which is how the Brits would say it. --RoySmith 00:49, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

• Comment why would anyone request an article on Chinese take-out boxes? It kindof boggles the mind. KillerChihuahua 00:31, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Someone obviously ran out of imagination and competence to improve any of the 3/4 million articles we have to offer. I mean, who the hell cares about sewing anyway? / Peter ^Isotalo 01:20, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. It's not going be a "real article" without violating a truckload of policies. Articles on take-out boxes belong in blogs or anecdotal websites, not in Wikipedia. / Peter ^Isotalo 01:20, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete; unencyclopedic, unsalvageable, trivial OR (and the author did not even get it right, as RoySmith observes). MCB 06:54, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - Unbelievably trivial, 1st person blurb. --Cactus.man ✍ 17:31, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete and add to Requested Articles. -Sean Curtin 06:08, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete and make sure this goes back on the list of Requested Articles. I firmly believe that a proper encyclopedic article could be written about Chinese take-out boxes, but this isn't it. Crypticfirefly 06:11, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
  • A further comment: five minutes of research has taught me that cartons that RoySmith mentioned were originally intended for holding shucked oysters and were adopted by Chinese restaurants in the 1940's. A common name for them in the packaging industry is "Chinese pail." A good article on this topic would mention these facts. Crypticfirefly 06:20, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

• Comment this page cracks me up --Ewok Slayer 02:01, 19 October 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.