Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chicken Paillard

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 delete. with no barrier to recreation of an article with encyclopaedic content that goes beyond a recipe and information already in the escalope article. SpinningSpark 12:45, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Chicken Paillard

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

WP:NOTACOOKBOOK, This is little more then a recipe and a repeat of information from the main article Paillard Seraphim System ^(talk) 05:24, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:09, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:09, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. WP:NOTCOOKBOOK. Article's only references are recipes. Ajf773 (talk) 08:49, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - and improve. While I wholeheartedly agree with both the above editors that the article currently is little more than a recipe, this is a pretty famous dish and warrants an article. I didn't really have time to do a more in-depth search, but even a cursory one reveals hundreds of hits on news and books. On the first page of the news search you have this article from the NY Times, although most articles are simply different ways of preparing the dish. I'd like to see more of a development of the history of the dish. While there doesn't seem to be in-depth sourcing that can be a quick fix for that, there are articles like this in Gastronomer's Guide which could be used as a means for building that history, even though it's a brief mention, as well as this article from the Chicago Tribune. Appears to meet WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:00, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete even if there is worthy material it can be merged with the paillard article. If anything it is "Chicken paillard" with a small-letter p. But I digress. Kingoflettuce (talk) 14:26, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as nom, without prejudice to recreation, considering how short the paillard article is, I don't think it needs to be spun out into multiple articles yet. Yes, that could be justified later, but we usually work from broad to narrow, only creating more specific articles as they become necessary. Seraphim System ^(talk) 14:35, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this is classic WP:NOTCOOKBOOK. If this were in fact a pretty famous dish it would have more non-cookbook sources. Compare the article at Melba toast. "Chicken palliard" might be entitled to a mention in a sentence in the section Escalope#Paillard or scallop. --Bejnar (talk) 03:17, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom as non-notable. Unfortunately this isn't a dish with a history comparable to veal Oscar or steak Tartare. --Lockley (talk) 04:38, 8 June 2017 (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.