Knowledge (XXG)

:Articles for deletion/McDonald's urban legends - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

218:. This article is so well-written I thought it might be a copyvio, but some key phrases don't Google as exact phrases. If everything in it were sourced, I'd vote "keep" on the grounds that I find it interesting and it's long enough to stand on its own as a separate article. Unfortunately, at present almost nothing in it is properly sourced or verifiable, so I see almost nothing in it to "salvage." Too bad, as the incidents in it ring true, are probably accurate, and would be worth keeping if sourced. Will change my vote if the article is greatly improved before expiration of AfD. I believe I'll go tag the unsourced statements. 238:
you shouldn't delete this article because the information it provides as it is titled, are legends, meaning that they have a tendency to lack of vericity, therefore these information is only usefull for amusing and as a reference to the history of this huge company called Mcdonald's
234:
JohnLeemk asked me to take another look. I think it's adequately sourced now; topic is borderline but article is now reasonably encyclopedic; and this would make a disproportionately large section if merged into McDonald's. 13:15, 16 January 2006
134:. The references consist of several articles which mention the pig fat thing, McDonald's own pages which verify the one about how many countries McD's operates in (though not that there is a notable urban legend relating to it), and 142:
case is covered elsewhere and I don't think pig fat and the countries thing merit an article of their own. The others are all introduced with something along the lines of "There is a rumour", which is a meaningless
361:
By the way, I have added another rumour to the article, also citing a reputable source. I firmly believe it would be impractical to merge this into the main McDonald's article because of its size.
267:. We can talk about rumours and urban legends, but only if it's verified that anyone actually talks about them; of all those here, only two 'rumours' are verified as existing (pig fat and 67:. Knowledge (XXG) is not Snopes, and the information is not of any substantial value. Any relevant information from this article that should be saved can easily be merged into the main 338:. A few minutes on Google, and I've gotten reputable sources for all but a couple of the rumours. This appears to be a worthy topic, and certainly more notable than 255: 75: 17: 369: 356: 330: 318: 306: 294: 280: 225: 202: 172: 156: 126: 114: 96: 84:. Mostly not-verifiable. External links are not directly related to content of article. Merge any verifable content into 52: 389: 36: 276: 152: 58: 388:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
263:
You've pretty much summed up the reason to delete. This is an encyclopaedia; we can only include stuff that is
251: 35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
104:
It does have references and tries to give both points of view. I got rid of that 'debunking fact' rubbish --
243: 272: 247: 148: 110: 49: 345: 105: 72: 366: 353: 199: 144: 222: 339: 29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
347: 215: 342:, IMO. I'm in the process of adding these sources to the article; here is a sample of them. 169: 123: 303: 291: 362: 349: 195: 264: 211: 219: 315: 89: 343: 165: 85: 68: 327: 93: 135: 326:
the article. Add a section to McDonald's article with the verifiable bits.
180:
what's useful into the main entry, delete the rest. 19:12 UTC 10 January 2006
268: 139: 138:, which is so far from being a reliable source it's not funny. The 382:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
39:). No further edits should be made to this page. 392:). No further edits should be made to this page. 214:puts the burden of proof on the contributor to 314:whatever bits have cites and delete the rest. 194:this informative but largely pointless piece. 8: 122:- fairly well-written and referenced. 18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion 7: 48:, but feel free to boldly merge. — 24: 302:. Sorry, couldn't help myself. 164:verifiable material back into 1: 57: 44:The result of the debate was 370:13:07, 16 January 2006 (UTC) 357:12:30, 16 January 2006 (UTC) 331:14:55, 14 January 2006 (UTC) 319:16:02, 13 January 2006 (UTC) 307:04:21, 12 January 2006 (UTC) 295:17:51, 11 January 2006 (UTC) 281:18:37, 11 January 2006 (UTC) 226:21:03, 10 January 2006 (UTC) 203:19:15, 10 January 2006 (UTC) 173:17:27, 10 January 2006 (UTC) 157:16:53, 10 January 2006 (UTC) 127:16:11, 10 January 2006 (UTC) 115:15:12, 10 January 2006 (UTC) 97:12:48, 10 January 2006 (UTC) 76:12:10, 10 January 2006 (UTC) 53:13:57, 16 January 2006 (UTC) 409: 290:per Crunch and Deadsalmon 385:Please do not modify it. 212:The verifiability policy 59:McDonald's urban legends 32:Please do not modify it. 46:no consensus to delete 190:with McDonalds, and 186:the suitable stuff, 340:Chicken McNuggets 279: 260: 246:comment added by 155: 113: 50:Cleared as filed. 400: 387: 275: 259: 240: 151: 108: 34: 408: 407: 403: 402: 401: 399: 398: 397: 396: 390:deletion review 383: 248:201.139.145.161 241: 62: 37:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 406: 404: 395: 394: 377: 375: 374: 373: 372: 333: 321: 309: 297: 285: 284: 283: 236: 229: 205: 181: 175: 159: 129: 117: 99: 61: 56: 42: 41: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 405: 393: 391: 386: 380: 379: 378: 371: 368: 364: 360: 359: 358: 355: 351: 348: 346: 344: 341: 337: 334: 332: 329: 325: 322: 320: 317: 313: 310: 308: 305: 301: 298: 296: 293: 289: 286: 282: 278: 274: 270: 266: 262: 261: 257: 253: 249: 245: 237: 233: 230: 228: 227: 224: 221: 217: 213: 210: 206: 204: 201: 197: 193: 189: 185: 182: 179: 176: 174: 171: 167: 163: 160: 158: 154: 150: 146: 141: 137: 133: 130: 128: 125: 121: 118: 116: 112: 107: 103: 100: 98: 95: 91: 87: 83: 80: 79: 78: 77: 74: 70: 66: 60: 55: 54: 51: 47: 40: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 384: 381: 376: 335: 323: 311: 299: 287: 242:— Preceding 231: 216:cite sources 208: 207: 191: 187: 183: 177: 161: 131: 119: 101: 90:Urban Legend 81: 64: 63: 45: 43: 31: 28: 336:Strong keep 170:Daniel Case 145:weasel term 124:Essexmutant 304:Jtmichcock 292:MiracleMat 273:Malthusian 166:McDonald's 149:Malthusian 136:Rotten.com 106:Astrokey44 86:McDonald's 73:Deadsalmon 69:McDonald's 363:Johnleemk 350:Johnleemk 120:Weak Keep 71:article. 300:McDelete 265:verified 256:contribs 244:unsigned 220:Dpbsmith 316:Kafziel 269:McLibel 196:doktorb 184:Salvage 140:McLibel 328:RicDod 324:Delete 277:(talk) 223:(talk) 209:Delete 192:Delete 153:(talk) 132:Delete 94:Crunch 82:Delete 65:Delete 312:Merge 288:Merge 271:). -- 235:(UTC) 232:Keep. 200:words 188:merge 178:Merge 162:Merge 16:< 367:Talk 354:Talk 252:talk 147:. -- 111:talk 102:Keep 88:and 365:| 352:| 258:) 254:• 198:| 168:. 92:. 250:( 109:|

Index

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
deletion review
Cleared as filed.
13:57, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
McDonald's urban legends
McDonald's
Deadsalmon
12:10, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
McDonald's
Urban Legend
Crunch
12:48, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Astrokey44
talk
15:12, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Essexmutant
16:11, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Rotten.com
McLibel
weasel term
Malthusian
(talk)
16:53, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
McDonald's
Daniel Case
17:27, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
doktorb
words
19:15, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
The verifiability policy

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.