Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Louis-style pizza

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 improved article. - Mailer Diablo 21:37, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

St. Louis-style pizza

This is an anonymously contested prod which does not have any sources, save but a few commercial spam links. Burntsauce 22:09, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That anonymously contested prod was me genius. And you should know enough to read prod's and that once contested, regardless of who contests them, you take them to AfD and not put the prod back on. Now, give a legit reason why it should be deleted. There are some commercial links but your prod asked for sources and I provided sources. The best I can tell, they are not commercial links. Now either prove they are commercial or come up with a better reason. Postcard Cathy 22:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If the best we can source an encyclopedia article with is commercial spam or unreliable sources it should be deleted. The reasoning is sound enough, I will let the community decide what to do. Burntsauce 22:22, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is the subject of the article and it's importance that should be the reason why an article stays or goes. Sources are important but IMHO are secondary. And if this article goes, so should the articles on Philly Cheese steak, Apizza, or New Haven-style pizza, Detroit-style pizza, New York-style pizza, Chicago-style pizza, California-style pizza and any other regional cuisine. So my question to you burntsauce is: regardless of the quality of sources, is this article wiki worthy? If the answer is yes, then it stays because sources to your satisfaction can always be found. If not, then start prod'ing or AFD'ing all the other regional cuisines. Postcard Cathy 17:45, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like this article. If you can read about philadelphia cheese steaks, why not St. Louis pizza? just my opinion.--Boscobiscotti 04:03, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, this is sourceable, and should have better citations. Postcard Cathy, please avoid personally attacking other editors. You should realize that an unreferenced article is potentially subject to deletion, and that the sources you've provided fall short of our best standards. I don't think they're spam but they're barely adequate for verifiability and certainly not for notability. --Dhartung | Talk 04:56, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Low-quality and/or purely local sources don't cut it for attesting to the notability of local phenomenon. As labels, New York-style pizza, Chicago-style pizza, and California-style pizza, say, all have widespread -- even international -- notability and references and consistent meanings; this doesn't seem to have any such thing. --Calton | Talk 07:50, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you read the article, you see it does have a consistent meaning. Postcard Cathy 17:49, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The pizzas shown on that page look just like the pizza I get from my local Arni's in Indiana. We don't call it St. Louis style pizza. We just call it pizza. I'm sure every region would like to think that they have influenced something in a particular manner. But as pointed out by Calton, only a few become well known enough that they are known nationally or internationally. --Cyrus Andiron 13:25, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom.Mmoneypenny 13:37, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. With few exceptions most of these "Wherever-style pizza" articles are better served by mentioning in the appropriate section in the pizza article. Particularly a style that does not demonstrate much in the way of widespread notability. Arkyan  ^(talk) 15:36, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep Guys, Don't be an ostrich. Just because you've never heard of it or you think it looks like a regular thin crust pizza are really, really lousy reasons to delete. You can read the article to see how it's different from the thin crust pizza at your local pizzeria. Here are some more, non-local, good sources attesting to the pizzas style and existence: Chicago Tribune, Miami Herald, There's also a lot of other references, including a 2003 feature from The Dallas Morning News, April 11, 2003, link is no longer live but available to anyone with a Nexis archive. "City famed for arch has another angle; St. Louis-style pizzas square off against all comers" by Kim Harwell, entirely about the pizzas. Also an older LA Times story I found. And really, all you had to do was take a few seconds to click past page 3 of the Google search results and see for yourself that this sort of pizza is fairly well-known to someone with even a minimal knowledge of pizza. (And, of course, the top google search results for St. Louis pizza are going to be St. Louis related). I'm more than willing to use my access to archived stories to improve this article. Just because it's less-famous-than-Chicago style pizza doesn't mean it somehow doesn't exist. --JayHenry 17:46, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
keep - article has citations from 4 major newspapers attesting to the notability of the term. WaysAndMeans 20:21, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above: not notable. Eusebeus 23:08, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- What part of WP:N are you referring to? We have references from The Chicago Tribune, The Los Angeles Times, The Dallas Morning News and the St. Louis Post Dispatch. Those sources satisfy every sentence of the notability guideline. --JayHenry 03:00, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep As noted above, there are now 4 major sources for this article that meet WP:N. Just because As a wikipedia user you are unfimilar with a topic, doesn't mean it isn't notible to be on wikipedia. Per Wikipedia guidelines, the only option is to keep Gamer83 19:40, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep Just because something may not be known outside the influence of a single metropolitan area does not mean something is not notable. --Millbrooky 23:28, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Page is now sourced. --ΨΦorg 04:34, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
keep please this one is now sources and looks much better yuckfoo 00:24, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Article has been improved past AfD levels. ~ G1ggy! _{Reply | Powderfinger!} 23:54, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment adding all those sources made me hungry to try one. I looked into ordering one from Imo's but it turns out that the minimum order is $75 and that will only get you four pizzas... I'm not really sure that's worth it. Does anyone still have any objections that this article deserves to be deleted now that I've cited everything? Is there anything else I can do to address concerns about it or can this be closed? --JayHenry 22:22, 15 May 2007 (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.

St. Louis-style pizza

zproxy.org