Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chicken and chips

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. Vanamonde93 (talk) 18:01, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chicken and chips

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

All of the four sources are the *barest* possible passing mentions, zero are significant toward GNG. Just because chicken (fried/roasted/whatever) is, like many other foods, commonly served with chips/french fries does not mean that the combination is a specific dish that is notable or needs its own article. Unlike the well-established fish & chips, I am not finding sources that specifically discuss this as a notable set, just a parallel name. Nor do sources establish the mentioned "chicken and chip shops" is a specific thing, rather that shops that specialize in chicken also offer chips as a common side, and I don't think this is a necessary article. Reywas92^Talk 04:51, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Reywas92^Talk 04:51, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand. RebeccaGreen (talk) 10:19, 24 March 2025 (UTC) [reply]
Redirect to Chicken tenders with a comment about how chips or fries are a common side dish. Moritoriko (talk) 07:24, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I am looking for sources, but just wanted to say that I don't think Chicken tenders is an appropriate redirect. The chicken in "chicken and chips" is not always in that form (in Australia, often not, I would say - it's often a quarter or half a roast or barbequed chicken with chips). RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:35, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Agreed, I'm usually fine with redirects but there's so little to this generic concept and no directly related article so I'd rather see it deleted. Reywas92^Talk 19:06, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:40, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing in the edit history of the article to indicate where proper sources might be found. The first source cited is a 1970s newspaper article about the rising price of beef. The third source even tells the reader in the citation that it is an advertisement, giving the price of chicken and chips. As did Special:Diff/528477895, which sets a low bar indeed when it is one of the better pieces of rubbish added to the article over the years. Looking for sources, the world seems to have written nothing more profound on this subject than the tautologous statement that it is chicken, with chips. The icing on the cake is that no image ever added to the article has illustrated the content that claims how it is usually packaged. Which makes a third of the article now at hand a lie; but then that is the last remnant of longer text originally in the article that seemed to be making the bizarre case that KFC does not sell chicken and chips. (For my own amusement, I tried to find a KFC menu on the WWW from somewhere near the places mentioned in Special:Diff/528477895, which was such a random addition to the article. I found one. It sells chicken, optionally with fries.) I see no way for this to become a proper article. Delete. Uncle G (talk) 15:37, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as a perfectly good compromise/ATD. There's literally one good source. I don't have the patience to look through potentially thousands of recipes, advertising, and Facebook posts on Google to find two more reliable sources. Bearian (talk) 00:40, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There are several scholarly articles looking at consumption of chicken and chips from the perspectives of unhealthy food/obesity and young people's preferred social spaces and sense of agency, eg "“Two quid, chicken and chips, done”: understanding what makes for young people’s sense of living well in the city through the lens of fast food consumption" [1] and [2] (which also says "a London-based observational study of food behaviours of secondary school pupils showed that the most purchased fast food takeaway product was chicken and chips. Further, that skipping lunch at lunchtime to save money for after school socialising and eating was a popular means of financing this"). There are also sources that talk about chicken and chips as a ubiquitous food consumed travelling through Essex, Holland and Belgium (a review of John Muckle's novel My Pale Tulip [3]) or through Iran by train (an article by Robert Fisk in The Independent [4]). There are recipes for home-cooked chicken and chips from Jamie Oliver [5], Better Homes and Gardens [6], Country Life [7], etc. There are newspaper articles like "Chicken and chips: My very first time" [8]; "Why chicken and chips now top the menu at Britain’s newest restaurants" [9]; "Liverpool's first KFC that sold chicken and chips for 47p" [10]; and a Zimbabwe election with one party giving away free chicken and chips "Zimbabwe election: Chicken and chips put a taste for democracy to the test" [11]. There are other scholarly sources which I haven't yet accessed, and books and journals which only show a snippet view on Google Books, such as the Journal of the British Chicken Association suggesting the use of chicken and chips as an alternative to fish and chips in 1964 [12]. There's a poem called "Chicken and Chips" in an anthology published by Oxford University Press, according to this book from 1998 [13]. This seems to me plenty to meet WP:GNG, and to write about health and social aspects of the meal, its history, and cultural uses. RebeccaGreen (talk) 05:32, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong disagree. These are minor passing mentions, generic, or inconsistent, still merely pairing a popular entree and a popular side and not enough to justify a standalone article even if the alliteration makes it a good name or that it parallels fish and chips. These recipes and subjects of articles are entirely different, sometimes about fried chicken and sometimes about roast chicken. Anything about history and cultural uses can go generally those articles or fast food or Fried chicken restaurant/chicken restaurant, such as the discussion relating to health. There's nothing substantive in those articles specifcally about this combination that justifies a standalone article and that can't be added to those articles, as well as ubiquitous French fries. Would be absurd to even mention in the encyclopedia that a political party gave out fried chicken once. Reywas92^Talk 16:40, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure where you are, but the use of word "entrée" to mean the main dish of a meal is (I think) North American - it is certainly not British or Australian (where an entrée is what you eat before the main dish). Perhaps "chicken and chips" is not a thing in the US as it is in the UK, Australia and New Zealand. Chicken and chips does differ from fish and chips in that the chicken is sometimes roasted on a rotisserie, sometimes (battered and) fried, sometimes processed chicken, sometimes actual chicken or chicken parts - but that is part of the selling point of each shop (as discussed in some of the sources I found). We also wouldn't call most shops selling takeaway chicken and chips "restaurants" - they are chicken shops (as named in the sources), cafes or just take-aways. I could just as well argue that there's nothing about fish and chips which couldn't be said in the Fried fish article (where in fact the first photo is of fish and chips!) RebeccaGreen (talk) 10:01, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We do have chicken and chips in the US, we just call them french fries and the chicken is fried. Fish and chips is a specific style of fried fish with less variation and as shown in the article has plenty of history specific to it and clearer cultural significance. This is not a good comparison. Reywas92^Talk 13:39, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Fails WP:SIGCOV. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 10:24, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As per nom. Given sources doesnt support and it Fails WP:SIGCOV.Rahmatula786 (talk) 04:52, 27 March 2025 (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.