Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Babybel


 * 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   speedy keep per WP:COMMONSENSE. Product easily meets the notability guideline. PeterSymonds (talk)  22:08, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Babybel

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non notable, blatant advertising, sources aren't that good. WhoopRoot (talk) 20:04, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Although poorly written, the company does seem to have enough notability. IRK! Leave me a note or two 20:59, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong and obvious keep this product is very well known, at least in the UK, where I am. Why not actully check how notable in WP:RS a thing is before nominating it, rather than going on whether you've personally heard of it?   Sticky Parkin 21:23, 10 August 2008 (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.