Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tembleque

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 keep. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 08:48, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tembleque

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I don't this article pass WP:GNG. Most of the links are to shops selling the product and a few recipes.

Unfortunately, there are no guidelines for food notability. Using the WP:GNG, I think this article fails to be notable due to the lack of discussion of the food item. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 22:58, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 22:58, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 22:58, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Puerto Rico-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 22:58, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep. Based on the sources that I was able to find, I'd say this is hovering around the borderline of notability, and I'm going to lean towards keep because of systemic bias against topics pertaining to non-Anglophone areas. Recipes for tembleque are extremely common; I'm not going to try to link to all of them, but there are dozens out there. As well as the two linked in the article, there's one from NYT, for instance (that article/recipe also mentions a book "Coconuts and Collards" by Von Diaz, which seems like a likely candidate for further sourcing, but I don't have access to a copy, unfortunately). I also found an article about its health benefits, though I'm not sure I trust the source to be reliable. It's also mentioned on the official website of the Puerto Rico tourist board, where it's one of six foods mentioned in the first paragraph as being traditional favourites on the island, as well as in other travel guides. Overall, I'm finding a great breadth of coverage, but not a whole lot of depth, but am leaning keep because of potential systemic bias. In the event that this isn't kept, it should at the very least be a redirect to Puerto Rican cuisine. Lowercaserho (talk) 14:34, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I am not sure how food notability works, but I do know that this is a big thing in Puerto Rican culture. It seems to have a lot of recipes and other sites about it. I also edited the article slightly to add more citations and removing a bit about "Packaged mixes are available" as possible advertising. ___GingeBro (talk • contribs) 15:27, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete - All the refs are to recipe websites, some of which promote ingredients used in the recipe (Goya, Silk). No refs for history of the food. David notMD (talk) 17:20, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It checks out, sounds tasty and so the following policies apply: WP:ATD, WP:NOTPAPER; WP:PRESERVE and, of course, WP:BITE. Andrew D. (talk) 18:25, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Davidson, how the hell does WP:BITE apply?!? I did NOT bite any newbie.

The article has been around the current state from around 2010.

Also, WP:ITEXISTS is a really crappy argument. And you can easily dratify it suitably establish notability. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 18:29, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As this is food, the reference to BITE is something of a joke. Made you tremble like a jelly did it? That's another one. See WP:CHILLOUT. Andrew D. (talk) 18:40, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Davidson, well it makes it seem you were accusing that I was WP:BITEing someone. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 18:48, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I notice that this article says that the Brazilian name for the dish is manjar branco, and that article states that manjar branco is identical to the Puerto Rican dish tembleque. Can anyone confirm if that is, in fact, true? If so, would it be proper to merge the two articles, so that we don't have two different articles on identical topics, just in different languages? I am actually not sure what the official Wikipedia policy is in cases like this. Rorshacma (talk) 21:29, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

They're different. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manjar_blanco#Puerto_Rico --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 16:48, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - this is a popular dessert not only in Puerto Rico, but in diasporan communities such as The Bronx. Merge as needed. Bearian (talk) 22:03, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Bearian, merge where? --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 23:42, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep - this dessert is a traditional holiday food, included in Juvenile books for use in American schools, when encouraging the children to learn about cultures from around the world. (See ref for "Salsa stories", which I added). Of course it appears in recipe books. Also, note all the desserts from around the world on Wikipedia, for example: Hakuto jelly--The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 15:46, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I added two encyclopedia article refs.--The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 22:28, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- sources at this point are good. Perhaps WP:HEY applies. matt91486 (talk) 05:35, 21 July 2019 (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.