- 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. Missvain ( talk) 04:03, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Stockholm Diet ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Seems spammy, cannot determine WP:Notability with all the promotional text, MAY qualify for speedy deletion under that category but it's marginal. I know "Deletion is not cleanup" but if the topic is notable, WP:Blow it up and start over seems appropriate in this case. It looks like a related topic was deleted on the Russian Wikipedia recently, assuming Google Translate is giving anything close to an accurate translation: ru:Стокгольмская диета ("Stockholm diet" according to Google), ru:Википедия:К удалению/20 ноября 2020#Стокгольмская диета (Google says "К удалению" means "To delete"). davidwr/( talk)/( contribs) 🎄 15:22, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs) 🎄 15:22, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs) 🎄 15:22, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Latvia-related deletion discussions. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs) 🎄 15:22, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete It seems more like an advert then an actual Wikipedia Page. Arsonxists ( talk) 15:48, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Please do not delete Sure it can be improved with more critical information. It is a very popular in Eastern and South Europe
Aleksandrs Lapajevs (
talk) 20:16, 12 December 2020 (UTC) Properly formatted.
davidwr/(
talk)/(
contribs) 🎄
20:31, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
- @ Aleksandrs Lapajevs: Nominator here. I hope that within a few days the article is changed so I, the nominator, can support keeping it. That will require three things, 2 of which we as editors can do, the first of which neither you nor I nor any other editor can do.
- First, it requires that the topic meet Wikipedia's notability requirements. See WP:Notability for details. If that isn't done, there's no point in spending time on the other things. We, as editors, can't wave a magic wand and cause reliable, independent sources to suddenly cover this topic in-depth if they have not done so already.
- Second, there must be suitable references that demonstrate this. That is also covered in the "notability" guideline. As part of that, it must be fairly easy for editors who are assessing "is this topic notable" to spot those references. Sometimes, listing 2-3 of the "best" references on the talk page will do the trick.
- Third, the article needs to be rewritten so WP:Blow it up and start over no longer applies. Strictly speaking, WP:Deletion is not cleanup but this article is so close to qualifying for speedy deletion as "spam" (other editors may say it actually DOES qualify) that even if 1 and 2 were taken care of tomorrow, at least some "cleanup" needs to be done immediately after, for the good of the encyclopedia.
- Ideally, 1 and 2 should be completed sooner rather than later, and those, plus a good start on 3, well before this discussion closes. These discussions usually run for a week. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs) 🎄 20:42, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator comment I didn't notice earlier, but
Draft:Stockholm Diet (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs) was created on 25 November by new account
Nutritionist1987 (
talk ·
contribs), deleted on 30 November by
Jimfbleak as "
G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion," then a new draft with the same name was created by Nutritionist1987 on 3 December. That draft was moved to the main encyclopedia by
Aleksandrs Lapajevs (
talk ·
contribs) on 12 December. Aleksandrs Lapajevs is not new to Wikipedia, but
his edit count is under 200 on all projects combined and very low on the English Wikipedia. He also created the Russian version,
ru:Стокгольмская диета as
ru:Участник:Aleksandrs Lapajevs/Черновик before moving it to the main encyclopedia a minute later. It was deleted from the Russian Wikipedia by
Venzz on 27 November.
ru: Logs for user Aleksandrs Lapajevs,
page logs for :ru:Стокгольмская диета
davidwr/(
talk)/(
contribs) 🎄
16:29, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
- What you want from me? I deleted the article in Russian Wikipedia because the significance was not shown. And it contained false information. For example, some inorganic eggs were mentioned there. There were many sources out there, but they didn't talk about diet. Sou it was fake sourses. Sorry for my bad English. -- Venzz ( talk) 16:47, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete This article reads like an ad and would need to be TNT'd anyway. I can't believe that the web results are all clickbait. Natureium ( talk) 18:29, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
- delete honestly this could've been g11'd, it's complete spam and total BS without any basis in science or medicine and obviously isn't notable. Praxidicae ( talk) 18:33, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete as pure advertising. JIP | Talk 21:02, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
- Keep This article has to be kept. First, its not so different from any other diet pages on wikipedia, for instance /info/en/?search=My_Weight_Loss_Coach and others. Second, in our region its the most popular weight loss method and has become part of our culture. Its being talked about on TV, radio, printed magazines, theatre shows, it has changed even a law. Third, it has over 5 million users, many celebrities. Fourth, even though it has been very popular and every person in our region has heard about it and many have used, until now there has not been any encyclopaedic source of information about it. Lets improve this page, but not delete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nutritionist1987 ( talk • contribs) 19:06, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
This article has to be kept.
No. It doesn't. Wikipedia isn't the place to peddle pseudo-scientific fad diets. Praxidicae ( talk) 19:11, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete non-notable/advert KylieTastic ( talk) 11:36, 19 December 2020 (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.
- 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. Missvain ( talk) 04:03, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Stockholm Diet ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Seems spammy, cannot determine WP:Notability with all the promotional text, MAY qualify for speedy deletion under that category but it's marginal. I know "Deletion is not cleanup" but if the topic is notable, WP:Blow it up and start over seems appropriate in this case. It looks like a related topic was deleted on the Russian Wikipedia recently, assuming Google Translate is giving anything close to an accurate translation: ru:Стокгольмская диета ("Stockholm diet" according to Google), ru:Википедия:К удалению/20 ноября 2020#Стокгольмская диета (Google says "К удалению" means "To delete"). davidwr/( talk)/( contribs) 🎄 15:22, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs) 🎄 15:22, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs) 🎄 15:22, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Latvia-related deletion discussions. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs) 🎄 15:22, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete It seems more like an advert then an actual Wikipedia Page. Arsonxists ( talk) 15:48, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Please do not delete Sure it can be improved with more critical information. It is a very popular in Eastern and South Europe
Aleksandrs Lapajevs (
talk) 20:16, 12 December 2020 (UTC) Properly formatted.
davidwr/(
talk)/(
contribs) 🎄
20:31, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
- @ Aleksandrs Lapajevs: Nominator here. I hope that within a few days the article is changed so I, the nominator, can support keeping it. That will require three things, 2 of which we as editors can do, the first of which neither you nor I nor any other editor can do.
- First, it requires that the topic meet Wikipedia's notability requirements. See WP:Notability for details. If that isn't done, there's no point in spending time on the other things. We, as editors, can't wave a magic wand and cause reliable, independent sources to suddenly cover this topic in-depth if they have not done so already.
- Second, there must be suitable references that demonstrate this. That is also covered in the "notability" guideline. As part of that, it must be fairly easy for editors who are assessing "is this topic notable" to spot those references. Sometimes, listing 2-3 of the "best" references on the talk page will do the trick.
- Third, the article needs to be rewritten so WP:Blow it up and start over no longer applies. Strictly speaking, WP:Deletion is not cleanup but this article is so close to qualifying for speedy deletion as "spam" (other editors may say it actually DOES qualify) that even if 1 and 2 were taken care of tomorrow, at least some "cleanup" needs to be done immediately after, for the good of the encyclopedia.
- Ideally, 1 and 2 should be completed sooner rather than later, and those, plus a good start on 3, well before this discussion closes. These discussions usually run for a week. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs) 🎄 20:42, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
- Nominator comment I didn't notice earlier, but
Draft:Stockholm Diet (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs) was created on 25 November by new account
Nutritionist1987 (
talk ·
contribs), deleted on 30 November by
Jimfbleak as "
G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion," then a new draft with the same name was created by Nutritionist1987 on 3 December. That draft was moved to the main encyclopedia by
Aleksandrs Lapajevs (
talk ·
contribs) on 12 December. Aleksandrs Lapajevs is not new to Wikipedia, but
his edit count is under 200 on all projects combined and very low on the English Wikipedia. He also created the Russian version,
ru:Стокгольмская диета as
ru:Участник:Aleksandrs Lapajevs/Черновик before moving it to the main encyclopedia a minute later. It was deleted from the Russian Wikipedia by
Venzz on 27 November.
ru: Logs for user Aleksandrs Lapajevs,
page logs for :ru:Стокгольмская диета
davidwr/(
talk)/(
contribs) 🎄
16:29, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
- What you want from me? I deleted the article in Russian Wikipedia because the significance was not shown. And it contained false information. For example, some inorganic eggs were mentioned there. There were many sources out there, but they didn't talk about diet. Sou it was fake sourses. Sorry for my bad English. -- Venzz ( talk) 16:47, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete This article reads like an ad and would need to be TNT'd anyway. I can't believe that the web results are all clickbait. Natureium ( talk) 18:29, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
- delete honestly this could've been g11'd, it's complete spam and total BS without any basis in science or medicine and obviously isn't notable. Praxidicae ( talk) 18:33, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete as pure advertising. JIP | Talk 21:02, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
- Keep This article has to be kept. First, its not so different from any other diet pages on wikipedia, for instance /info/en/?search=My_Weight_Loss_Coach and others. Second, in our region its the most popular weight loss method and has become part of our culture. Its being talked about on TV, radio, printed magazines, theatre shows, it has changed even a law. Third, it has over 5 million users, many celebrities. Fourth, even though it has been very popular and every person in our region has heard about it and many have used, until now there has not been any encyclopaedic source of information about it. Lets improve this page, but not delete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nutritionist1987 ( talk • contribs) 19:06, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
This article has to be kept.
No. It doesn't. Wikipedia isn't the place to peddle pseudo-scientific fad diets. Praxidicae ( talk) 19:11, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete non-notable/advert KylieTastic ( talk) 11:36, 19 December 2020 (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.