Talk:Sucrology

This article was nominated for deletion on 8 December 2022. The result of the discussion was merge.

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles

Food and Drink task list:

To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:

Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt
Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar
Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish
Participate in project-related deletion discussions.
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food
Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section

Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

Wow........never heard of such a hobby. There are only 250? doesn;t shock me...67.176.14.100 16:20, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging[edit]

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and carefull attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 18:35, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Content to merge[edit]

I'm new to AfD discussions but common sense suggests that with a merge result we discuss what content to merge and what to leave out. However, unsure whether discussion takes place here or in a separate merger discussion page.

My suggestion is, so long as the sourcing is satisfactory:

Lead - omit, retain Sucrologist definition in the sugar packet article

Type of sugar packets - omit, already noted in the sugar packet article

Acquisition - omit, places where packets found already noted in the sugar packet article and the rest seems obvious

Clubs - trim, just mention London club and Italian event in a single sentence

Themes - retain, that seems an important part of the hobby

Storage - omit, seems overly detailed

Guiness World Record - retain

No need for any subheadings. Rupples (talk) 22:44, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Rupples I'd add an important qualification: don't merge anything that doesn't have a reference, per WP:V/WP:OR. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 15:59, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus. Jeez. While looking for a source for the "themes" part of this article I came across a kind of blog which shows photographs of a booklet on Sucrology. There's pictures of all the booklet's pages and the wording is the same as in this article. There's no author's name or date on the publication. I can share with you the link but wasn't sure that I should due to copyright issues. Rupples (talk) 17:07, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Rupples You could share the link, that's ok. But without a date of publication we can't be certain who committed a copyvio. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:24, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus Here's a link. [1]. Suppose it's possible (may even be probable, due to the niche subject) that the author of the booklet was the person who copied the text on to the sucrology article. Rupples (talk) 14:04, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Possible. Reading some comments there leaves me with an impression that this is some new artsy project, not an old work, which makes it more likely Wikipedia content was copied into it. Hard to be 100% sure without contacting the author. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 15:51, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]