🇮🇷 Iran Proxy | https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Chicken_and_Rice
Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chicken and Rice

Add links
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 delete, ignoring several votes that was votestacked here and some of the very new users, and most of the article read like original research anyways. Jaranda wat's sup 00:58, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chicken and Rice

[edit]
Chicken and Rice (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Reads like an ad. Half the article cannot be verified using reliable sources and the article uses weasel words galore to verify it self. Delete per WP:NOR MartinDK 07:46, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FYI I have opened a related afd on Hallo Berlin Bwithh 21:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
FYI2 I have opened a related cfd on Category:Tourist_dining. Bwithh 21:39, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently I was there at the wrong hours. Anyway, most of this article is unreferenced--the only verifiable thing is that the place exists and has a following. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 16:31, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete a thorough article, but without sources that directly concern the food cart itself, it is not sufficiently independently verified.-- danntm T C 16:54, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete encyclopedically non-notable. Wikipedia is not a dining guide. I work in this area and occasionally go to carts like these, but wikipedia is not an open advertising space/directory for random food carts. Going off to afd Hallo Berlin now .Bwithh 21:11, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep first under WP:NOT there is nowhere where it says Wikipedia is not a place for looking up restaurants as long as the article is non-bias and non-advert. This article is neither. On top of that this place is VERY notable. Quick research shows that this site has been covered by multiple independent sources stating "I work in this area and occasionally go to carts like these, but wikipedia is not an open advertising space/directory for random food carts" is a completely irrelevent argument because the notability of "a food cart" compared to that of Chicken and Rice is the same thing as saying I have met people therefore George W. Bush is no different. This stand is a has been cited as a place for strengthening the muslim communities in New York and is a constant hot spot in New York for food. Secondly, the article is CITED, just because there are a few uncited sources does not warrent a delete. New York city is a large city, how is nominations for the vendy award not notable? Valoem talk 22:19, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment WP:NOT#INDISCRIMINATE clearly states that Wikipedia is not a travel guide or restaurant guide. MartinDK 22:44, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Comment this is not a travel guide, it is a cited place of interest that has been cited by multiple indepedent sources and has won awards. Secondly Wikipedia does include restuarants nowhere on that page does it say otherwise. That page also made it clear that small cafes and such as not notable per Wikipedia, however a cited awarded dining location is. Valoem talk 22:52, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
a place for strengthening the muslim communities in New York... eh? Bwithh 06:26, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't delete this page. Being a Chicken and Rice addict I can verify it. By the way if you don't think you can verify the article think again- look at the October 23rd article in the NY Post or Daily News, there was a murder near the stand and they speak of the popularity of the stand.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.163.100.65 (talk • contribs)

  • Delete For every band there are 5 food carts. I see no indication of notability other than the fact that someone got stabbed near them. That is not notability. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 05:22, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment/Restated Keep First thing to KEEP in mind AFD is not a vote please dont leave per someone if there is already counter-argument to that argument. Before anyone votes please read through this response. I am sorry, but I am very busy right now with school, however I agree per nom that this article needs to be cleaned of word weasels in order to remain NPOV. One that is cleared this article should pass AfD. Once I have cleaned the article I will update this page.

First of all the Street Vendor Project, Vendy awards is a New York City sponsored public program run by Urban Justice [1] therefore winning the Vendy Awards is notable since it is a public program of New York City. A statement of "street vendors" in my town has also won an award is irrelavent since NYC is among the most notable cities in the world. Also this article pass notability and is not a self promotion since it has been cited by multiple indepedent sources. I will go over a list of citations.

      • 1. Chicken and Rice is an integral part of student life at New York University. It is a major hot spot for food among NYU students. [2]
      • 2. The stabbing involved was directly related to the food served by the vendor. The lines can grow so long that a person stab another person for "cutting in line". Name me another food stand that can do this. [3]
      • 3. Chicken and Rice has won a notable award from a public service of New York City. It is has been cited as "uniting the Muslim community from the tri-state area and beyond in their search for halal food" [4]
      • 4. As both a Wikipedia editor with a good history and a customer of Chicken and Rice, I can be a primary source to this event. All of the information on the page is true minus the POV comments. The food itself is amazing and is more notable than even the Grease Trucks and can generate unbelievable lines. [5] I live in Princeton, New Jersey and have travelled countless times to NYC just for a platter. Many of my peers have done the same. I have cited all the claims. Valoem talk 08:02, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • Comment AfD is a voting process. You cannot "Restate" your keep and tell everyone else they cannot vote because of it. Doesn't matter if you are in school. If you continue this way you are disrupting the voting process/AfD. People do not make reliable sources. Stop making up your own policies, they are bogus. MartinDK 08:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No it isn't a voting proccess, but he is right that you should not Summeries in bold your opinion more than once as it can be confusing to the closing admin. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 15:20, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I deeply apologize for not staying cool. The edit he made has since been change by him. The original edit that I reacted so sharply to can be seen here [6] MartinDK 17:55, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • quote:"uniting the Muslim community from the tri-state area and beyond in their search for halal food".... um, yeah, its really not so hard to find halal food in the tri-state area, certainly not hard enough to unite the community in a quest. Bwithh 17:28, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • quote:As both a Wikipedia editor with a good history and a customer of Chicken and Rice, I can be a primary source to this event - you're welcome to start your own wiki based on this pioneering idea of reliable primary sources. but it's totally alien and unacceptable to this wiki encyclopedia Bwithh 17:28, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • Response One can use a primary source to establish facts, just not for establishing notability. Many of the statement in that article can be sourced by simply going to Chicken and Rice. I was stating that I have been there and can confirm its accuracy (as can anyone) not that I was trying to create a new precedence. Much of the facts are cited on the homepage of the Chicken and Rice as well. Valoem talk 18:02, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, I live in Manhattan and I've passed by this specific food cart many times by walking or driving. So what? I'm not denying that this cart exists Bwithh 19:28, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Update I have cleaned the entire article I have removed word weasels and cited information many from primary sources.
  • Comment at MartinDK Please watch your mannerism on Wikipedia. You are still new to Wikipedia please be aware of the rules and to not start a flame war. AfD is not a vote http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion#How_to_discuss_an_AfD.2FWikietiquette please read the rules. And you can restated a keep. I have work hard to keep articles on Wikipedia please view my history. Your accusation of me disrupting this policies is an assumtion of bad faith which is against Wikipedia process. It is very clear I am acting in good faith. Please do not flame or discourage others from editing wikipedia it is against WP policy. Valoem talk 08:30, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - advert-style mean that the page reeks of POV, and the notability seems to be questionable at best. Moreschi 10:09, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This article passes WP:V since many citations are sourced. So it passes WP:Notability since it has been cited by multiple indepedent sources. Also the article has been cleaned already please tell me what else needs to be clean and I will do so. Valoem talk 11:44, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I have restored my former edit. I stated that Wikipedia is not a vote, because a few editors were saying the same thing. The reason why I said "Before anyone votes please read through this response" is because I tried by best to disprove many of the reasons why this article was nominated in the first place. I cited sources to disprove WP:OR and that this article was WP:V. I wanted to put an emphysis on what I said which is why asked people to read my comment. However this statement was irrelevant to the debate which is why I removed it not because I was trying to hide something. Also my statement about being busy with school was because I initially did not have time to edit the Chicken and Rice article so I was hoping someone else could, however I did so anyways, which is why I removed that statement as well. Because of issues unrelated to this AfD I was forced to put it back in. Valoem talk 17:47, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete "Falafel slay stuns kin". Good Lord. WP:NOT an advertising service for food carts that received some passing notoriety. ~ trialsanderrors 00:24, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I disagree, it passes the notability test. I do not seem to understand where this is an advertisement, all word weasels have been removed please specify. Valoem talk 02:08, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, for Pete's sake. A list of New York City restaurants (let alone "food carts") that regularly have "50 people in line" could be a category unto itself.Vafthrudnir 02:51, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment once again please read the entire discussion. I will say again, it has been nominated the Vendy Awards which is sponsored by Urban Justice an NYC public program. Secondly Street Cart NEVER get 50 people daily in a line. If you know of others that have not been nominated, then you have a counter argument. Valoem talk 05:28, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep; if you get past the inherent bias against the subject, what you've got here is a well-written, referenced article on something that appears locally notable. I don't think people are treating this article fairly. Everyking 04:43, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep; This is actually a well known New York establishment, although the write-up should do more to establish it's notability. It has been a contender for several Vendy awards in New York, which I believe qualifies it via the Wikiproject: Food and Drink's notability guidelines. Also, the recent stabbing there was very big in the local news. --DDG 17:08, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. --Easyas12c 17:24, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not just this one person - only a few instances of "opinion canvassing". but its not a good trend. I'm not sure if this variety of vote-stacking is technically out of order, but it's just not cricket. I could selectively post messages "asking for their opinion" on the talk pages of editors I know have deletionist tendencies or are friendly with me, and I could post an one-sided perception of the debate on the talk pages of admins too, but I don't do it because its not in the spirit of afd Bwithh 19:33, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a blatant example of vote-stacking. Another "asking for their opinion" post [7]. Possible "working the ref" attempt [8]. I'm sure these were done in good faith (and the admin gave a fine neutral response), but I don't think this is appropriate for afd. Should I and MartinDK actively go around canvassing deletionists and "briefing" admins? These are things I've never done, and I've spent a lot of time on afd - and tehse are things I won't do Bwithh 19:42, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I ignored the vote Jaranda wat's sup 00:58, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Response I have only asked for the opinion of EveryKing and Easyas12c. My calling for Easyas12c was more because he is an inclusionist, however I did not ask him to say keep, just what he felt given the circumstances, however for Everyking, it was completely neutral. I wasn't asking Mailer Diablo for an opinion on the AfD itself, just who he felt had the stronger argument. In fact you have asked me for my opinoin for several AfD as well, it happens all the time. I see nothing wrong with asking for notable Wikipedia editors for opinions, it is not the same asking sockpuppets and random people. Valoem talk 20:17, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I asked for opinions, also see WP is not paper therefore since the article has been cited and notability is established this should be maintained. Valoem talk 17:50, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not paper, but it is also first and foremost an encyclopedia and is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Notability criteria are encylcopedic notability criteria. Bwithh 19:28, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The discrimination is based on Notability, which this passes. Valoem talk 19:39, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The whole point of the notability guidelines is to serve Wikipedia as an encyclopedia Bwithh 19:44, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • UPDATE: I have added more citation and removed a few more Word Weasel I found, I also added new sources. Primary source is not OR, but a source that can be easily confirmable by simply going to Chicken and Rice. Valoem talk 19:23, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Its a new york land mark Darklordabc 20:16, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment If a push cart is a New York landmark then apparently I haven't missed much which I find strange given what I have otherwise heard of New York as a great place to visit. Seriously, am I the only one who finds this devotion to a food cart a little too much? I can understand they serve great food but this is just an odd AfD when you really think about it. But that is just my two cents, you can disregard them if you disagree. Happy editing everyone, MartinDK 21:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I agree with MartinDK. While this article is now less POV in tone, it's still just an article about a food cart. I'm trying to imagine what would happen if every popular local mobile food vendor in Shanghai or Mexico City or wherever were to get their own Wikipedia article. Can I write a page documenting the history of my friendly neighbourhood ice cream van? It just seems an odd thing to have in an encyclopaedia. --Folantin 21:59, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep I disagree, all POV references have been removed, the article most certainly establish notability as there was both a stabbing over the food because of the demand and the nomination for top 4 food cart's in New York City. This article was nominated for POV and OR and based off my reading both have been removed. Also, what do you mean just a food cart? Johnathan Wendel is "just" video game player, Charles Carl Roberts is "just" a murderer, and the Wellesley College Senate bus is "just" a bus. Are you suggesting that food carts can not have articles despite notability claims? Of course a small cart in Shanghai won't get an article unless it establishes notability. If that cart in Shanghai is rank one of the best food carts in China then it most certainly deserves an article. Wikipedia is not bias. Simpleerob 22:43, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above account's sole purpose seems to be debating on AfD's. MartinDK 22:49, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have been doing AfD's, yes, (non-biasly of course) it is easier to do AfD then search for articles with vandalism or add information, however I have been adding information recently. Simpleerob 05:21, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep this article passes WP:CORP criteria on more than one level and is not a self-promotion. "The company or corporation has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the company or corporation itself. " and the subject's services pass "The product or service has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the company itself" Killerhun00 00:23, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, AFD is not a vote. It looks like one, it has a lot in common with one, but it isn't a vote. It's an attempt to achieve a consensus decision, or failing that, to measure community feeling. The closing admin uses the page to make a decision, considering first the weight of argument, and then perhaps the weight of numbers. Mistakes happen, which is why WP:DRV exists. The raw numbers are a part of the process, sometimes they they are even the major part of it, but it's not a vote.
Regarding this specific page, merge to food cart. Most of this article should be chopped, but there are things in there that are not in food cart, such as a description of how the cart works, typical food. Maybe the bit about customer demographics and probably the stabbing. I think there is enough mentions of Chicken and Rice to earn it a line in 'food cart' but not an entire article of its own. Regards, Ben Aveling 09:21, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Chicken_and_Rice&oldid=1136113163"