Deletion of Smoked Meatloaf

Comment: First, Wikipedia is |not a recipe book; such facilities exist on Wikibooks, as I understand it.  Even so, coming to my second point, the article, contrary to Paul McDonald's assertion, is not a recipe: as of my entry here, it describes it as a new favorite amongst barbecueniks, and a variation on meatloaf - and ''that's it''.  This is not a recipe, and in fact it's not even a definition
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: with some clarifications. As said earlier, if a recipe were presented there,  a recipe guide. Of course, that doesn't mean we never have articles on various types of foods-we most certainly do. What's necessary to establish |notability, though, is exactly what it says in that guideline-multiple, non-trivial, and |reliable sources. Forums, due to their anonymous and unverified nature, are not a reliable source-though sometimes a post on a forum can point you to better sources which ''would'' be considered reliable, I've had that happen more than once Googling for references. As to smoked meatloaf, let's say it really takes off. A couple of big, respectable cooking websites cover it, followed by some "food section" coverage in newspapers. ''Now'' we got what we need-multiple non-trivial reliable mentions. At that point, it's time to create an article! Hopefully, that makes some amount of sense out of it-the notability and sourcing guidelines can be tricky at first
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT||WP:N||WP:RS)

Comment: per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: Source is a forum post. Therefore, |unverifiable
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V)