Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink/Beverages Task Force/cleanup

From December 2006 through February 2007, the primary project of the WikiProject Cocktails was a Wikipedia-wide search, identification, categorization, cleanup, merge, and appropriate purges of all mixed drink related articles (which also includes beer cocktails, wine cocktails, shooters, non-alcoholic mixed drinks, drink mixers, cocktail garnishes, and drinkware).

In February 2007, the focus has changed to article assessment, adding our infobox to articles, article improvement and/or merging, and other

You do not have to be a Participant of the WikiProject to help. If you see or create an article which falls within the scope of our Project, please tag the talk page with {{WPFOOD|mix=yes}} (please refer to the documenation).

Project members should regularly check the mixed drink article stubs and Project To-Do List to find where additional help is needed. Obviously any articles being considered for deletion should receive the highest priority. All articles should be reviewed for quality and depth of information.

• Articles that are essentially nothing but drink recipes or lists of ingredients, should have the ingredients copied to the List of cocktails or a related list, and then note the talk page that this was done. The articles must be converted to redirects to preserve GFDL licensing and contribution information for the merged information. Many editors are not aware of this, so it should be mentioned (strongly if necessary) in any AFD discussions.
• Articles with more information, such as historical information, notability, pop culture references, origins of the name, etc. should have the recipe and preparation notes moved into the {{WPMIXInfobox}}.
• Review the information remaining in the article after the infobox conversion. Rate and prioritize the article on the talk page within the {{WPFOOD|mix=yes}} tag. This is a very important step so that other Project Participants can prioritize their efforts most efficiently. For more information, please visit the Assessment Department.
• Excellent articles that you feel should serve as good examples for other articles should be added to the Cocktail Articles of Quality list. This helps everyone gain an understanding of what the other articles should look like.

Articles currently being considered for deletion

The following articles are being considered for deletion prior to the conclusion of the Cleanup Project (apparently people either do not read our notices or do not care about how deleting articles prematurely makes our job much more difficult). If you see a WikiProject Cocktails article being considered for deletion, please add it to this list and include the reason and date. After the decision is made, include the results. After one month, old decisions should be removed from this list.

Actively Being Discussed - Please add new articles to the TOP of the list.

Discussions Completed

• Backdraft (drink) (2nd nomination) - No consensus/Keep

Reason: Article has been allowed to remain, largely due to assurances that it would be referenced, improved, and expanded or else merged into another article prior to 2007-03-01. --Willscrlt 17:14, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Recreated Articles

• Incredible Hulk (cocktail) - Recreated

Six new references (including the New York Times) and expansion of the article have been included in the article. Hopefully that will be enough to avoid another speedy deletion or AFD. --Willscrlt 17:14, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

What to do if an article is nominated for deletion

• Go to each article's discussion page and vote to REDIRECT the article to a better location (like the List of cocktails, List of beer cocktails, List of wine cocktails, or another similar drink article. The reason for the redirect is that if any portion of the article is kept, we are obligated to maintain the edit history of the article under the terms of the GFDL license. Deleting an article which has been incorporated into one or more other articles breaks that history (technically it is recoverable by admins, but that is not good enough under the GFDL).
• If you feel the article is worthy of saving, tackle it right then and there. Start editing the article. Track down citations and references, explain the notability of the article's topic, add verifiable information to the article to expand it, reword and edit the article for clarity, add photos to the article from WikiCommons or that you take yourself (only use public domain or GFDL licensed images), and otherwise fix the article. As you improve the article, be sure to update the AFD page so that new voters (and those who revist the page) will see the improvements and hopefully vote to keep the improved article.
• Never assume that the AfD process will automatically decide in favor of keeping or redirecting. Depending on how others view the article and any past AfD discussions, they may see the article as hopeless to salvage. As this WikiProject continues to gain a stronger reputation for improving articles, our comments may be taken with more weight credible, but until then, it is a good idea to temporarily copy article content to our work area. The work area is a temporary holding area for articles in jeopardy of being deleted prematurely or that need a lot of work that would be disruptive if done in mainspace. It is not a sandbox or permanent storage for deleted articles, but it is a place for Project members to work on articles with the time and dedication that more complicated articles require.
• If you agree with the nomination to delete the article and feel the article is practically worthless, salvage any useful information and merge it as appropriate. Remind people discussing the AFD that because portions of the article have been kept elsewhere, the edit history must be maintained for GFDL reasons, and that the article should be converted to a redirect instead of being outright deleted.
• No matter what your personal feelings are, remember to remain civil, courteous, and professional in all discussions. It is never the end of the world if an article is deleted (even if you spent a lot of time working on it). Administrators can recover lost information for us, and we can come up with a plan to reintroduce truly worthy information back into the Wikipedia. We just want to be sure that we do not simply repost deleted articles as-was. Doing so is against policies, will result in speedy deletions of the articles, and give the Project a bad reputation. Always work within the policies of Wikipedia, and remember that the other person is often right. :-)