Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Almond cookie (2nd nomination)

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 merge to Almond biscuit. L Faraone 00:24, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Almond cookie

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

Completing a malformed AfD nomination that wasn't logged. The original verbatim nomination (from the article's creator, diff page) at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Almond cookie (which now redirects here) was as follows:

"The article Almond cookie was speedily deleted as being duplicative of Almond biscuit, an article about a Chinese almond bakery item. I created the [[almond cookie[[ article and am putting it up for deletion so how best to handle the subject matter can be discussed. Thank you for input and suggestions.Candleabracadabra (talk) 23:11, 16 May 2013 (UTC)"[reply]

This 2nd nomination was created by: Northamerica1000^(talk) 15:57, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Almond biscuit, which I have already performed. Northamerica1000^(talk) 16:02, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:47, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it makes sense to merge an article about almond cookies, which take various forms in different cuisines, into an article about one type of almond biscuit. To me it doesn't seem constructive to either article. Candleabracadabra (talk) 02:08, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Per recent changes to the Almond biscuit article, it is not about one type of almond biscuit at this time. There may not be enough sources comprised of significant coverage for a stand-alone article about almond cookies. However, much of the information is verifiable, so it can be included in the Almond biscuit article. Importantly, in some countries and languages, "cookies" (as they are referred to in the U.S.) are referred to as "biscuits" (see Biscuit – Variations in meaning). The speedy deletion nomination was incorrect, because the information was not duplicated in both articles (prior to the merge). I still feel that a merge is the most proper way to handle this, per WP:PRESERVE. Northamerica1000^(talk) 08:50, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Almond biscuit (or vice versa), and then clean up that article. Right now, it looks on first glance like it's about the Chinese biscuit because of the boxes/images on the right. Ansh666 02:09, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Almond biscuit has been reorganized. Northamerica1000^(talk) 21:47, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think that made it worse. It should go from general to specific, not the other way around. The pictures are off, too. In any case, there's nothing to change my opinion on the AfD'd article. Ansh666 00:36, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How are the images "off" in the article? Northamerica1000^(talk) 12:38, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Went ahead and fixed it. Still think the order is backwards, though. Ansh666 20:04, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merge one into the other, due to a potential WP:FORK problem. Bearian (talk) 18:02, 20 May 2013 (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.