- 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 keep. ( non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 07:56, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Toffifee
- Toffifee ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No indication of notability. Laun chba ller 19:32, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
- keep That's why we have WP:BEFORE. How about going and finding such indications? This is a pretty substantial international brand. Storck are one of the top ten world confectionery makers. I don't know their market share, but their ad budget for Toffifee is £3M. There are UK TV adverts running right now. Let alone trade papers like The Grocer. Maybe such things aren't in the article at present, but per our policy for deletion the criteria are whether such things exist, not if nominators can't be bothered to look for them.
- This is not an interesting article and nor is it an interesting product. However that is not a valid reason for deletion. Your recent spree of confectionery deletions ( Paynes Poppets, Moser-Roth, Toffifee & Moser-Roth (twice)) have been on such shaky basis as " If this [Paynes Poppets] ends in delete, I will also be AfDing Toffifee.", "Much worse product, as well, but I don't like nuts" or just being completely confused between Moser-Roth and Storck, yet not bothering to sort your own knowledge out before slapping around the deletion requests. AfD is not about your ignorance, or your dislike of nuts, it's about notability and very little else. Andy Dingley ( talk) 21:53, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
- Keep. Yeah, fairly big big brand really is Toffifee (or Toffifay in the US). My minute or two on Google came up with these, from Esquire, The Grocer, Talking Retail, Scottish Grocer, and Kennedy's Confection. I mean they're not exactly weighty tomes about Toffifee, but they do demonstrate notability. Dylanfromthenorth ( talk) 00:11, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica 1000 04:14, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica 1000 04:14, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 01:14, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
- Keep. Nom has admitted he's using this Afd for cleanup here, this should only be done if the nom suspects that an article is not notable, however his comments indicate he's fully aware the article is notable rendering that rationale invalid. Szzuk ( talk) 21:22, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Clearly notable brand, though it is difficult to find extensive information on it. This is fairly typical from HighBeam. -- I am One of Many ( talk) 07:23, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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 keep. ( non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 07:56, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Toffifee
- Toffifee ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No indication of notability. Laun chba ller 19:32, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
- keep That's why we have WP:BEFORE. How about going and finding such indications? This is a pretty substantial international brand. Storck are one of the top ten world confectionery makers. I don't know their market share, but their ad budget for Toffifee is £3M. There are UK TV adverts running right now. Let alone trade papers like The Grocer. Maybe such things aren't in the article at present, but per our policy for deletion the criteria are whether such things exist, not if nominators can't be bothered to look for them.
- This is not an interesting article and nor is it an interesting product. However that is not a valid reason for deletion. Your recent spree of confectionery deletions ( Paynes Poppets, Moser-Roth, Toffifee & Moser-Roth (twice)) have been on such shaky basis as " If this [Paynes Poppets] ends in delete, I will also be AfDing Toffifee.", "Much worse product, as well, but I don't like nuts" or just being completely confused between Moser-Roth and Storck, yet not bothering to sort your own knowledge out before slapping around the deletion requests. AfD is not about your ignorance, or your dislike of nuts, it's about notability and very little else. Andy Dingley ( talk) 21:53, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
- Keep. Yeah, fairly big big brand really is Toffifee (or Toffifay in the US). My minute or two on Google came up with these, from Esquire, The Grocer, Talking Retail, Scottish Grocer, and Kennedy's Confection. I mean they're not exactly weighty tomes about Toffifee, but they do demonstrate notability. Dylanfromthenorth ( talk) 00:11, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica 1000 04:14, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica 1000 04:14, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 01:14, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
- Keep. Nom has admitted he's using this Afd for cleanup here, this should only be done if the nom suspects that an article is not notable, however his comments indicate he's fully aware the article is notable rendering that rationale invalid. Szzuk ( talk) 21:22, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Clearly notable brand, though it is difficult to find extensive information on it. This is fairly typical from HighBeam. -- I am One of Many ( talk) 07:23, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
- 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.