This article was nominated for deletion on 15 October 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Several months ago I came across an article that says that the eyes in cheese are NOT formed directly by bacteria but there is a nucleation point at a hay particle. I cannot find an authoritative article but here is a reference http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/how-does-swiss-cheese-get-its-holes the scientist names in the article may give a hint on where to track down authoritative information. 47.186.6.103 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:41, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
The consensus from the above discussion was clearly to merge the information contained in this article. The question was what to merge it with and cheese ripening was the final choice. Michał Rosa ( talk) 09:18, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
Response to Third Opinion Request: |
Disclaimers: I am responding to a third opinion request made at WP:3O. I have made no previous edits on Eyes (cheese) and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process (FAQ) is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes. Third opinions are not tiebreakers and should not be "counted" in determining whether or not consensus has been reached. My personal standards for issuing third opinions can be viewed here. |
Opinion: One particularly wise Third Opinion Wikipedian, RegentsPark, once succinctly put the purpose of Third Opinions like this, "It's sort of like if you're having an argument on the street in front of City Hall and turn to a passer-by to ask 'hey, is it true that the Brooklyn Bridge is for sale?'." This is an opinion of that sort. Note that in adjudging the !votes at AfD there are three mutually–exclusive alternatives: keep, merge, and delete. Alternate votes such as "keep or merge", "keep/merge", or "delete/merge" in effect add one !vote into two of those alternatives. In this case, by my count, there were, after splitting the alternate votes, 6 for keep, 5 for merge, and 4 for delete. (None of the keep–only or delete–only comments asserted or suggested that merger would be acceptable, except that by Aisha9152 who simply did not bold–face her "or merge" and which I treated therefore as a "keep/merge". I also treated Laozi's "Keep but move" as only a merge.) With it that close, there was clearly no consensus for any one of the three alternatives, so the default result was correctly stated as "keep," not "delete" or "merge". |
What's next: Once you've considered this opinion click here to see what happens next.— TRANSPORTERMAN ( TALK) 15:26, 27 October 2010 (UTC) |
I'm moving the following solitary sentence out of the article until somebody can write a somewhat more comprehensive history section or figure out how to integrate this content:
Regards, Sandstein 09:51, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
This article was nominated for deletion on 15 October 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Several months ago I came across an article that says that the eyes in cheese are NOT formed directly by bacteria but there is a nucleation point at a hay particle. I cannot find an authoritative article but here is a reference http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/how-does-swiss-cheese-get-its-holes the scientist names in the article may give a hint on where to track down authoritative information. 47.186.6.103 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:41, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
The consensus from the above discussion was clearly to merge the information contained in this article. The question was what to merge it with and cheese ripening was the final choice. Michał Rosa ( talk) 09:18, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
Response to Third Opinion Request: |
Disclaimers: I am responding to a third opinion request made at WP:3O. I have made no previous edits on Eyes (cheese) and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process (FAQ) is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes. Third opinions are not tiebreakers and should not be "counted" in determining whether or not consensus has been reached. My personal standards for issuing third opinions can be viewed here. |
Opinion: One particularly wise Third Opinion Wikipedian, RegentsPark, once succinctly put the purpose of Third Opinions like this, "It's sort of like if you're having an argument on the street in front of City Hall and turn to a passer-by to ask 'hey, is it true that the Brooklyn Bridge is for sale?'." This is an opinion of that sort. Note that in adjudging the !votes at AfD there are three mutually–exclusive alternatives: keep, merge, and delete. Alternate votes such as "keep or merge", "keep/merge", or "delete/merge" in effect add one !vote into two of those alternatives. In this case, by my count, there were, after splitting the alternate votes, 6 for keep, 5 for merge, and 4 for delete. (None of the keep–only or delete–only comments asserted or suggested that merger would be acceptable, except that by Aisha9152 who simply did not bold–face her "or merge" and which I treated therefore as a "keep/merge". I also treated Laozi's "Keep but move" as only a merge.) With it that close, there was clearly no consensus for any one of the three alternatives, so the default result was correctly stated as "keep," not "delete" or "merge". |
What's next: Once you've considered this opinion click here to see what happens next.— TRANSPORTERMAN ( TALK) 15:26, 27 October 2010 (UTC) |
I'm moving the following solitary sentence out of the article until somebody can write a somewhat more comprehensive history section or figure out how to integrate this content:
Regards, Sandstein 09:51, 17 January 2015 (UTC)