Talk:LesserEvil

This article was nominated for deletion on 2 April 2024. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article was nominated for deletion on October 26, 2022. The result of the discussion was delete.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Brands Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands 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.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Companies Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies 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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Connecticut Low‑importance

	Connecticut portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Connecticut, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Connecticut 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.ConnecticutWikipedia:WikiProject ConnecticutTemplate:WikiProject ConnecticutConnecticut articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Food and drink Low‑importance

This article 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

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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.

Deletion[edit]

Hello, @CityLimitsJunction, this page was originally deleted and I see you have re-created it. I have had a cursory look and I am not sure the issues we identified at the AfD back in 2022 have been solved. The sources do not seem, at first glance, to be reliable or independent. If that is the case, I think it should be deleted. Jtrrs0 (talk) 11:17, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Jtrrs0, the primary issue raised for the previous version of the page was that the sources provided were "almost all press releases or otherwise non-independent." This is not the case for the article in its current state. Sources such as The Journal News, The Stamford Advocate, Business Wire, Hartford Business Journal, Forbes, and Food Business News, which are all independent sources, are referenced in the current article. CityLimitsJunction (talk) 16:24, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thank you for getting back to me. I will have a detailed look at the new sources soon, but, respectfully, I have severe doubts. Eg Business Wire is a press release website. Indeed, part of the problem in 2022 was that most of the sources were from BW, so frankly I am not optimistic. Jtrrs0 (talk) 17:46, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Jtrrs0, Business Wire is no longer listed in the references. I have replaced it with a more reliable source, WFSB Connecticut News. With that, there are no longer any press releases cited. Thank you. CityLimitsJunction (talk) 22:56, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks. That's definitely an improvement. I'll have a look at the sources in detail over the weekend and tell you what I think. Jtrrs0 (talk) 23:10, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've also gone ahead and removed some material that imo read rather 'puffy' and violated WP:NOTPROMO. Jtrrs0 (talk) 23:17, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you should have received a standard form notification on your talk page, out of courtesy I just wanted to let you know I have gone ahead and nominated it again for AfD. I don't do so lightly but I am just not convinced that the sources it has establish its notability nor, frankly, that we'll find the sources at this stage. Jtrrs0 (talk) 17:49, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of ingredients called out in RS SIGCOV[edit]

Hey, Jtrrs0, it's a food product. Why wouldn't ingredients be relevant? Valereee (talk) 16:53, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it's a food company not a product. The Ingredients section doesn't quite make sense in my opinion. Saying Carla Lalli Music, writing for Bon Appetit, and dietician Kelsey Kunik, writing for Eat This, Not That, noted the short list of ingredients (emphasis mine) doesn't make sense. The short ingredient list of their products generally? The Eat This Not That source [1] is just about one of their products. Likewise the bon appétit source [2]. It's about a single product. If what you want to say is that LesserEvil's Himalayan Pink Salt popcorn has been praised for having few ingredients the sources would support that ... but that's just trivia. Hardly belongs in an article about the company.

I also note from your edit summary that you think these sources amount to RS SIGCOV. I disagree but will reply in the AfD to avoid dragging that discussion here. Jtrrs0 (talk) 17:23, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's a food company with food products. Yes, the impression I got from those two sources was that the lists of ingredients are very short generally; can't say that specifically because the sources don't say that specifically, but it's still relevant discussion in RS. Valereee (talk) 17:33, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not convinced it adds anything. I agree it gives that impression but we can’t say it. But that’s precisely my point. There’s nothing relevant there to say… I won’t insist on it now because I now you argue that these source show notability and don’t want it to seem that I want to remove the sources that evidence notability and then say there’s no notability at AfD. But I’m not convinced it adds anything (or shows the company’s notability). Jtrrs0 (talk) 18:33, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's reasonable information, not trivia, which might be of use to readers, which is why we'd include it. After I had three experts commenting on different products, I felt like we could revise to a more general statement. Valereee (talk) 18:37, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]