Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bubblegum broccoli

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. Tone 18:51, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bubblegum broccoli (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Kind of a shame to lose this one, but there's very little here. Originally, there were 5 sources, but 4 of them were based on the one source that mentions this oddity. I've been unable to find additional sources and there is no logical merge target. It's certainly too trivial for the general McD's article. The next most logical place is the list of products, but this was never a product, just an evolutionary dead end. SummerPhD^v2.0 18:40, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 21:40, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete All of the coverage for this is based off of the single incident where the CEO of McDonald's mentioned it anecdotally as a failed product that never moved past the testing phase. Aside from this one incident, there was never any further coverage or lasting impact that would indicate any sort of notability, thus failing the WP:GNG. As the product was never released, merging it to any of the McDonald's-related articles or lists would serve no purpose. Rorshacma (talk) 21:59, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep (or merge to Don Thompson (executive). Seems to meet GNG - sources are often dependent upon one "master source", but still indicate notability, and make comment. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 06:38, 31 May 2019 (UTC).[reply]
  

Comment - The only evidence we have that the subject of this would-be article exists is one mention in an interview in one source. I don't see that as meeting GNG's demand for significant coverage in multiple sources. I also don't the CEO of a corporation mentioning the broccoli as being independent of the subject. At the same time, I'm not seeing what this tells us about Thompson that we would consider it a meaningful part of his biography.

Like I said, I think it's an interesting little bit of trivia that simply isn't a useful addition to any existing article. - SummerPhD^v2.0 21:56, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe Broccoli would be a better target. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 22:51, 1 June 2019 (UTC).[reply]

• Delete Passing coverage of a product that never it out of development. Plantdrew (talk) 23:34, 1 June 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.