Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Front of house (foodservice)
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 merge. Majorly (o rly?) 00:37, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Front of house (foodservice)
dictionary definition Vicarious 09:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
- Concur on dicdef; Transwiki to Wiktionary, merge and redirect to Foodservice. Alba 16:15, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
- Keep as a stub. There is the the possibility of expansion to cover areas such the operations, etc. as evidenced by web articles such as this. -- Whpq 17:53, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ⇒ SWATJester On Belay! 19:05, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- Merge into Front of House and/or Foodservice. A quick mention in both wouldn't hurt. →EdGl 01:03, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- merge - but back into Front Of House, and not into Foodservice. Reasons: 1) "front of house" is a term used in many different public-house operations and not just in restaurants, and 2) this article originally was split from Front Of House, which deals with the more general meaning of the term. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 18:56, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- Merge back into Front of House, where it is appropriate to mention meanings of the term other than for venues. –Pomte 05:53, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Let me ask a simple question. How can I, someone who's totally clueless about food service industry jargon, tell if the term is something that's actually used in the food service industry, or if it's something an editor just made up? If the article doesn't give me enough information for a totally clueless person like myself to be able to tell, the attribution policy requires a Delete. Also, right now the only thing in the article is a definition (See WP:NOT#DICTIONARY). Minimum requirements for a keep vote include an explanation of why the topic is something notable and reliable sources describing the term and explaining why it's of interest. Best, --Shirahadasha 06:45, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- comment Every article has to start off with an attributed definition of terms? Does the first line always need an inline link to a definition from Dictionary.com? As fore, I still think this stub should be merged back into its original article, Front of House, which also doesn't have any attribution (and nor does Foodservice). Maybe I should just cut and paste the one line of this article and put this debate to death right now. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 12:48, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- There. Done. WP:BB. After 30 seconds of strenuous labour, I have now merged its one line of text back into Front of House. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 12:52, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- comment Every article has to start off with an attributed definition of terms? Does the first line always need an inline link to a definition from Dictionary.com? As fore, I still think this stub should be merged back into its original article, Front of House, which also doesn't have any attribution (and nor does Foodservice). Maybe I should just cut and paste the one line of this article and put this debate to death right now. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 12:48, 16 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.
