Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Osh Pyozee

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. Argument for deletion is stronger in this discussion. Yanksox 21:57, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Osh Pyozee

Dict def. Wikipedia is not a cookbook. eaolson 04:06, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

• Keep That's not a recipe. It has potential to be expanded beyond a dicdef.--Kchase T 04:24, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Into what? Unless the dish has some national, cultural, or regional significance (not stated in the article, but certainly possible), this is just an article that exists to define the term. We don't have a stuffed peppers or tuna noodle casserole article, either. eaolson 04:30, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
    • We have lots of such articles at Category:Food and drink stubs, but I don't really think of such comparisons as a good argument. Instead, see meta:eventualism.--Kchase T 04:49, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
  • This article is not a dictionary definition. It is a stub. The two are not the same thing. Uncle G 10:07, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Much as I hate using the argument, a solid precedent has been set for articles for culturally significant foods. See : Category:Korean cuisine, Category:German cuisine, Category:Chinese cuisine, Category:Indian cuisine... There are hundreds of articles on every ethnic dish you can think of. --Xrblsnggt 06:11, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Actually, see Gado-gado (AfD discussion) and b:Cookbook:Gado-gado. Uncle G 10:07, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment. Fair enough, but can you expand it to demonstrate that it is "culturally significant"? There's no claim that it's any different from my mother's Nanaimo bar recipe. -- Slowmover 16:12, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Xrblsnggt, the unpronouncable user ;x. — Adrian Lamo ·· 09:18, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. The fact that someone may someday expand this dicdef into a stub or maybe into a short article is scrying the future. If this dish is "culturally important" that's something else the writer forgot to include. No notability shown, implied, or attempted. Tychocat 15:16, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
• I'm voting delete per Tychocat. But I will change my vote if conditions warrant. -- Slowmover 16:14, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
• Merge into either Culture of Afghanistan or perhaps a new article on Afghan food. I think at this point the former would be more appropriate, unless someone volunteers to create the latter. I don't see any good reason to delete the content, but it's silly for this dish to have its own article. --Ginkgo100 ^{talk · contribs · e@} 18:00, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete unless cultural significance is established. A merge might be inappropriate if this is not a significant dish; I would not expect to see any mention of (for example) roast celeriac in an article on British culture, even though it's a dish numerous Britons enjoy. — Haeleth Talk 18:39, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
• Merge per Ginkgo100. Unless there is something notable about it, it can be mentioned in an overall article about the cuisine of that country. --Aguerriero (talk) 23:04, 10 August 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.