Talk:Ardagh Castle Cheese

Speedy Deletion

Notable for winning a medal at the British Cheese Awards 2011. References available in reliable sources. --HighKing (talk) 18:16, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Fine.  M   Magister Scienta^talk (17 November 2011)

FYI, the onus is also on *you*, as the tagger, to also check for references. Tagging an article barely 3 mins after I'd edited it suggests you could have tried a little harder.  :-) Peace. --HighKing (talk) 18:20, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

@HighKing : Since you removed the tags and I don't think it passes WP:GNG or WP:ORG lets take it to WP:AfD. Mtking ^(edits) 22:25, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Notability

Mtking, the closing statement was that there was *no consensus* as to whether the sources met GNG or not in the closing statement of your AFD. As per WP:BRD I have removed your insertion of the tag - in my mind it is undeserved. This article meets all the criteria. It has been mentioned in a book, has won a major award recognized world-wide, and has been mentioned in the biggest regional paper in Ireland. That's actually more than required, and that's leaving aside your concerns with the official government publications. Rather than edit war over this, I've posted a note at WP:N/N. --HighKing (talk) 02:39, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

WP:BRD is an essay thoes who wish to assume ownership of an article hide behind, it has no relevance to this, if you read what the tag says ("The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's general notability guideline. Please help to establish notability by adding reliable, secondary sources about the topic") so it's use where there is no consensus on notability is highly appropriate. It should remain until sources have been added that show it meets WP:GNG and there is a consensus here that it does. Mtking ^(edits) 06:52, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

If you wish to edit-war, that's your concern. BRD, while an essay, is designed to encourage editors to discuss changes to articles - including tags. My main concern is your stalking of my edits just because we don't agree on certain Ireland-related topics such as what to call the article for the state. I've tried to AGF, but you have no interest in cheese articles, and this is the 2nd article I've created that you have decided to attack. If you really had an interest in cheese, why wouldn't you start with British cheese and look at articles like Harbourne Blue, Shropshire Blue, Stichelton or Tintern cheese. In fact, take any of the British cheese articles and find one with 5 references like the Irish ones you're trying to deface. Your anti-Irish stance is nationalistic and WP:POINTy editing at it's worst. Your AFD failed, so you are now trying to "vandalize" the article with labels and tags by claiming that no consensus exists over the sources. Yet you have not discussed your reasons why you believe the existing sources are inadequate. Why not?

According to WP:ORG - Wikipedia bases its decision about whether an organization is notable enough to justify a separate article on the verifiable evidence that the organization or product has attracted the notice of reliable sources unrelated to the organization or product. Notability requires only that these necessary sources have been published.

• The book Farmhouse Cheeses of Ireland: A Celebration meets this requirement. It is significant coverage from a reliable source and independent of the subject.
• Similarly, the article in the largest regional newspaper in Ireland is significant coverage from a reliable source and independent of the subject.

The primary criteria have been met simply with these two references. I would further argue that inclusion in the Bord Bia booklet is significant coverage from a reliable source independent of the subject - it doesn't matter to the criteria if it is "marketing" material or not - so long as it is from a reliable independent source unconnected with the subject. --HighKing (talk) 16:27, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

I do find the statement "WP:BRD is an essay thoes who wish to assume ownership of an article hide behind, it has no relevance to this" sounds to me like a bad faith attack and is rather a concern especially in the light of HighKing's allegation of stalking. Could the temperature be lowered a bit and why the descent to this level of aggro so quickly? Dmcq (talk) 17:07, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

As a passing editor, with no axe to grind, I would agree the notability for this cheese is very borderline. And my understanding of AfD's is that if the debate is inconclusive there is nothing to stop an article being re-listed at some point. Notability seems to rest on (1) the article in the local newspaper (2) the bronze award. According to the British Cheese Awards, they give a medal to 1/3 of the entrants to this competition - it would be more transparent to name which category the cheese won an award in. The Marketing Board literature says the cheese production is tiny and only available from the farm. This seems to be a cheese in its very early months of production. All that being said, well done to the author for providing references and not being over effusive in the description. There are many other food and drink articles on WP that are far less worthy of an entry! Sionk (talk) 17:38, 4 December 2011 (UTC) P.S. I forgot about the book entry - it would be helpful to know more about what the book says about Ardagh Cheese. Similarly with the other sources, there is currently virtually nothing about what the sources say (and why they are cited). Sionk (talk) 17:50, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

As Dmcq says below, you can see the pages on Amazon (I can see both pages).

I'm keen to understand why this article might fail WP:ORG, especially as you say that notability for this cheese is "very borderline" (and does that mean you believe it meets the criteria (barely) or not?). BTW, the cheese has been in production for several years. I've added the criteria under which is won the award - thanks for pointing that out. And thank you as well for taking the time to read the article and voice your opinion - I'm most appreciative of that, as well as your kind comments. --HighKing (talk) 22:54, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

There is a better description of the book on amazon at [1] and you can look at some of the pages. There's two pages on this, I was able to see the second page about this cheese maker which included a summary and a bit about the goats cheese. Dmcq (talk) 18:01, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

That's amazing, amazon rank it as 64,835 overall but #8 in Irish food and drink books! Dmcq (talk) 18:15, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

I find "notability" to be subjective between subjects. I think the cheese is not notable for 99.9% of the population, just like 7000 minor planets, many thousands of obscure species and many chemicals. I have an interest in astronomy and chemistry, so I suspect that cheeses interested some people. I can't think of good reasons to exclude a cheese over lumps of space rock. Blessed are the cheesemakers. --Iantresman (talk) 18:29, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Small businesses can gain a commercial advantage by being listed on the world's 5th most popular website. This is a small cheese producer, not necessarily a single type of cheese. I doubt rocks or chemicals care much about whether or not they're listed :) Sionk (talk) 20:36, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Why should Wikipedia especially discriminate in favour of big businesses and not talk about a small business if the small business is notable? I think we should just ignore this aspect and go on straight notability. Dmcq (talk) 22:58, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

The servers can handle the miniscule extra load! Can't see the imperative for attempting to close down these articles. A bit sceptical to see a trend wrt eds (ed?) that persistently seek removal. RashersTierney (talk) 23:17, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Trying to summarize the contributions above. There's no specific argument against any specific source. Clarifications have been provided where requested, and a link to Amazon enables editors to check the contents of the book. The editor placing the tag has chosen not to comment, and has just posted a notice saying they're away until 17th December. Nobody here has stated that the article *fails* notability - although it's noted that there hasn't been an exclamation of "notability" either. But unless I'm reading things wrong, all editors have basically agreed that the subject is notable, even if it "barely" meets notability. I propose to remove the tag from the article unless anybody has any objections. If you object for any reason, please post here detailing the reasons - try to be as specific as possible. --HighKing (talk) 13:09, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Suggest you leave it to another editor to remove the tag. It may avoid the edit war flaring up again. Sionk (talk) 13:26, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

I understand why that is a good suggestion. If it were a popular article with lots of traffic and hits, that wouldn't be a problem and I'd be happy to leave it to someone else. I suspect this discussion is possible the last time so many editors will be looking at this page (sad, but true). The editor was looking for a consensus (as am I) as to whether the sources are good and if the article meets GNG/ORG or not. Perhaps I've rosy-hued glasses on, but I believe from the comments above that a consensus has emerged. I'm happy for another editor to remove the tag - just feel it's unlikely anybody else will be interested enough. --HighKing (talk) 13:40, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

You can watch its fortunes with [2]. I like looking at that site every so often to see how some articles are doing. It's quite surprising how well and how badly some things do. If you can get pictures of the cheese and have a good spread of different cheeses in Wikipedia then perhaps you'll get a community of cheese eaters here. ;-) Dmcq (talk) 20:36, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ardagh Castle Cheese. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120425161321/http://www.southernstar.ie/article.php?id=2564 to http://www.southernstar.ie/article.php?id=2564
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.thecheeseweb.com/images/2011%20bca%20winners%20list_363.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:14, 8 July 2017 (UTC)