Template:Did you know nominations/Meal deal
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: rejected by Feminist (talk) 02:23, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
Withdrawn
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Meal deal
- ... that more than one in three Britons buy at least one meal deal per week? Source: More than a third of consumers buy a lunchtime meal deal at least once a week, found a poll of more than 2,100 shoppers conducted by Harris Interactive for The Grocer.
- ALT1: ... that a bottle of wine included in a meal deal in the UK must be taxed separately? Source: The tax authority asserts that while the food items included in the promotion are zero-rated for value added-tax purposes, the levy should be paid on the wine because it is not a gift: its supply is conditional on the purchase of the food. About £14m is in dispute, according to someone briefed on the case.
- Reviewed: Marcela Revollo
Converted from a redirect by Feminist (talk) and Voello (talk). Nominated by Feminist (talk) at 16:49, 14 October 2022 (UTC).
Yes, it became a redirect on December 17, 2021, but it was an article before that and that formed the basis for the current version. IMO, this can only qualify if it becomes a five-fold expansion of the August 7, 2021, version (i.e. 707 characters x 5 = 3535; currently at 1808 characters). The other big issue I have is that a meal deal is not just a British concept; it is also a well known meal promotion in US and Canada (and who knows what other countries). In other words, the article needs to be globalized. The good thing is that that could form the basis for the needed 5x expansion. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:20, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
New reviewer, please. I don't see anything on WP:DYK which suggests IMO, this can only qualify if it becomes a five-fold expansion of the August 7, 2021, version
. The content of the pre-WP:BLAR version is nottext spun off from a pre-existing article
under WP:DYKCRIT because none of the text appeared on any live article as of 7 October 2022, when I converted this from a redirect to an article. Regarding meal deals in the US and Canada, if one can point me to WP:RS focused on the same concept as it pertains to these two countries, I am happy to add these into the article. feminist (talk) 17:36, 18 October 2022 (UTC)- The comparison of the old version and the restored version makes is obvious that it is a continuation of the previous article, hence I feel it should be a 5x expansion. But no prejudice against other reviewers who interpret this differently. That said, there is plenty of material to expand the article for a global view anyway... -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:06, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
- On second thoughts, I think the rules are sufficiently ambiguous that a debate on the merits of such a nomination would distract editors from more useful contributions. I'll work on something else. feminist (talk) 02:23, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
- The comparison of the old version and the restored version makes is obvious that it is a continuation of the previous article, hence I feel it should be a 5x expansion. But no prejudice against other reviewers who interpret this differently. That said, there is plenty of material to expand the article for a global view anyway... -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:06, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
