Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gil-e-Firdaws

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 of the debate was Delete --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:05, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gil-e-Firdaws

It's a recipe...Wikipedia is not a recipe book methinks... Bladeswin 01:42, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - Although there's nothing saying Wikipedia can't include recipes, there is no reason to have one for such an obscure dish, because there are millions of recipes out there and where do we draw the line. Edrigu 01:53, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete possible typo of Gil-e-Firdaus, and still unencyclopedic. — Adrian Lamo ·· 01:55, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: wow, Gil-e-Firdaus wasn't redlinked. figured it would be. It's a duplicate of this article, and up for transwiki to wikibooks, so there's no reason not to delete this one. — Adrian Lamo ·· 01:56, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete WP:NOT 1.7.8 (Wikipedia is not an instruction manual) Royboycrashfan 02:38, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Wikipedia is not a cookbook (or any other subset of instruction manual). OhNoitsJamie^Talk 06:51, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Ohnoitsjamie. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 09:34, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, try Wikibooks cooking instead. --Terence Ong 10:38, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom --† Ðy§ep§ion † ^{Speak your mind} 02:01, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

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.