258:
is not about so called 'The
Chocolate Trinity'. The phrase is not widely used in this context and even on the Diocese of York website only appears in one article, a transcription of the lecture. It is a neologism, a newly coined phrase, it is not widely used and it does not have significant coverage.
177:
in talks. There are articles on the three Quaker philanthopists referred to and significant academic and popular studies of the influence of them and their relations. Two of the Brands they gave their names to are still household worlds. The confectionery industry is a major part of the food sector
283:
doesn't meet any of the requirements for notability (not even close). It's an interesting phrase, and could be mentioned in the relevant articles (Sentamu, Cadbury, Rowntree, Fry, possibly Quaker history, etc), but can't justify an article on its own. As a member of the Quaker wikiproject, I would
194:
Vernon, you know I'd love to agree with you, and I'd love it if the subject of this article were suitable, but I'm not sure that it is. I could only support its inclusion if it were in more widespread, documented use. Is there potential to transwiki? I don't know what inclusion criteria wiktionary
324:
Author can mention the information in an article about the history of chocolate manufacturing in
Britain, if there is one; and on Knowledge (XXG), there probably is one. Chocolate Trinity sounds like a horrible idea for an alternative to the
178:
of the Market. The charitable ventures that they founded are still in action and doing valued work. It is to be expected that the Quaker wikiproject will develop further links to this article in due course.===
259:
Cadbury, Rowntree, Fry and
Sentamu are notable people in their own right and of course have their own articles. The phrase and context would be best located in these articles imo. --
110:
83:
78:
284:
rather spend my limited time on the many Quaker-related articles that badly need improvement, rather than waste my time trying to rescue this one. --
87:
70:
17:
248:
350:
36:
332:
316:
300:
288:
275:
263:
231:
215:
199:
186:
161:
149:
121:
52:
74:
349:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
174:
66:
58:
326:
256:
252:
297:
313:
212:
183:
272:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
207:: Why is it that youall have so many Userboxes? Try reading John of York's lecture notes.===
141:
131:
260:
329:
244:
228:
158:
135:
309:
208:
179:
118:
240:
170:
49:
104:
285:
196:
239:'The Chocolate Trinity' (and 'The Trinity of Chocolate') is a phrase used by
157:
Definitely no need for an article here; non-notable and neo as above. –
173:
is a notable live WP article and John of York frequently refers to
117:
Term used during a lecture to describe 3 chocolate manufacturers.
243:, Archbishop of York, in a lecture in Sept 2006 when speaking of
343:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
169:: I hope that this article an be retained and developed.
100:
96:
92:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
353:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
138:(lack of independent reliable sources). —
308:: The sense of the Meeting is delete.
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
1:
370:
333:14:09, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
227:- non-notable neologism.
53:02:51, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
317:15:23, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
301:07:46, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
289:22:59, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
276:13:44, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
264:12:19, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
232:10:19, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
216:14:20, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
200:13:31, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
187:10:11, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
162:09:38, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
150:09:19, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
122:08:12, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
346:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
327:Chocolate Easter bunny
175:The Chocolate Trinity
67:The Chocolate Trinity
59:The Chocolate Trinity
314:T A L K . . . to me.
255:. The lecture itself
213:T A L K . . . to me.
184:T A L K . . . to me.
134:, with no signs of
361:
348:
271:per Oli Filth -
144:
108:
90:
34:
369:
368:
364:
363:
362:
360:
359:
358:
357:
351:deletion review
344:
140:
81:
65:
62:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
367:
365:
356:
355:
338:
336:
335:
319:
303:
298:Paul Carpenter
291:
278:
266:
234:
222:
221:
220:
219:
218:
164:
152:
115:
114:
61:
56:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
366:
354:
352:
347:
341:
340:
339:
334:
331:
328:
323:
320:
318:
315:
311:
307:
304:
302:
299:
296:as neologism
295:
292:
290:
287:
282:
279:
277:
274:
270:
267:
265:
262:
257:
254:
250:
246:
242:
238:
235:
233:
230:
226:
223:
217:
214:
210:
206:
203:
202:
201:
198:
193:
190:
189:
188:
185:
181:
176:
172:
168:
165:
163:
160:
156:
153:
151:
148:
145:
143:
137:
133:
129:
126:
125:
124:
123:
120:
112:
106:
102:
98:
94:
89:
85:
80:
76:
72:
68:
64:
63:
60:
57:
55:
54:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
345:
342:
337:
321:
310:Vernon White
305:
293:
280:
273:Cyborg Ninja
268:
241:John Sentamu
236:
224:
209:Vernon White
204:
191:
180:Vernon White
171:John Sentamu
166:
154:
146:
139:
127:
116:
45:
43:
31:
28:
142:SMcCandlish
261:Malcolmxl5
136:notability
330:Mandsford
229:Oli Filth
159:Alex43223
132:neologism
249:Rowntree
119:650l2520
111:View log
322:Comment
306:Comment
245:Cadbury
205:Comment
192:Comment
147:‹(-¿-)›
84:protect
79:history
50:Caknuck
294:Delete
286:NSH001
281:Delete
269:Delete
237:Delete
225:Delete
195:uses.
155:Delete
128:Delete
88:delete
46:Delete
197:SamBC
105:views
97:watch
93:links
16:<
251:and
167:Keep
101:logs
75:talk
71:edit
253:Fry
109:– (
312:-
247:,
211:-
182:-
130::
103:|
99:|
95:|
91:|
86:|
82:|
77:|
73:|
48:—
113:)
107:)
69:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.