From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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) Kagundu Talk To Me 13:52, 13 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Triscuit

Triscuit (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG despite editors being affected by its ad campaign. Dysklyver 21:08, 6 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Dysklyver 21:09, 6 October 2017 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Dysklyver 21:09, 6 October 2017 (UTC) reply
despite editors being affected by its ad campaign Uh, can you clarify this vague assumption of bad faith? Are you suggesting an undisclosed COI? If so, which editors do you suggest are involved? Additionally, can you clarify your WP:BEFORE search? Because I've spent about five minutes looking and found several books. ♠ PMC(talk) 04:12, 7 October 2017 (UTC) reply
Um this?... "I'm going with a Nuclear Powered Speedy Keep, on account of a huge advertising campaign ("Don't forget the Triscuit!"), millions upon millions of boxes of these things sold annually, scads of these things on my local supermarket's shelves, and many and sundry other reasons too numerous to list. In short, Triscuits are many things, but they are certainly not non-notable. -- Dennis The Tiger ( Rawr and stuff) 8:21 pm, 13 May 2007, Sunday (10 years, 4 months, 28 days ago) (UTC−4)" perhaps you disagree but subconscious inluence does not equal bad faith, I am not accusing anyone of bad faith. Dysklyver 10:07, 7 October 2017 (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.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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) Kagundu Talk To Me 13:52, 13 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Triscuit

Triscuit (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG despite editors being affected by its ad campaign. Dysklyver 21:08, 6 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Dysklyver 21:09, 6 October 2017 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Dysklyver 21:09, 6 October 2017 (UTC) reply
despite editors being affected by its ad campaign Uh, can you clarify this vague assumption of bad faith? Are you suggesting an undisclosed COI? If so, which editors do you suggest are involved? Additionally, can you clarify your WP:BEFORE search? Because I've spent about five minutes looking and found several books. ♠ PMC(talk) 04:12, 7 October 2017 (UTC) reply
Um this?... "I'm going with a Nuclear Powered Speedy Keep, on account of a huge advertising campaign ("Don't forget the Triscuit!"), millions upon millions of boxes of these things sold annually, scads of these things on my local supermarket's shelves, and many and sundry other reasons too numerous to list. In short, Triscuits are many things, but they are certainly not non-notable. -- Dennis The Tiger ( Rawr and stuff) 8:21 pm, 13 May 2007, Sunday (10 years, 4 months, 28 days ago) (UTC−4)" perhaps you disagree but subconscious inluence does not equal bad faith, I am not accusing anyone of bad faith. Dysklyver 10:07, 7 October 2017 (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.

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook