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
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.
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
Will someone please explain why Saxa is unencylopedic? I'm not saying whether it is or isn't, however no reason has been given as to why it is unencylopedic. Salinae23:12, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't work that way. We need to find references establishing that the subject of the article is encyclopedic according to the WP:N and WP:V guidelines. If you feel that the subject meets those criteria, then remove the deletion notice from the article. —Psychonaut23:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]