Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brussels cookies


 * 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. Yummy! :) - Mailer Diablo 16:28, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Brussels cookies
A consensus was reached at DRV to overturn the speedy deletion of this article. This is a procedural nomination so I abstain. Thryduulf 15:34, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep as a well-knonw brand of cookie from a highly-noted company. --badlydrawnjeff talk 15:41, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Then you should easily be able to make a proper argument, citing sources, demonstrating that this product satisfies the WP:CORP criteria for products. Uncle G 17:57, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Abstain Do we anticipate a separate article on every cookie/biscuit from every manufacturer? If this one is unique or otherwise notable, keep it. If it isn't, delete it. In the UK, I've never heard of it or the company, so cannot comment on its notability or lack thereof. Emeraude 16:44, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. Meets the requirements for product notability. Original speedy was nonsense.Cynical 22:57, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Yum!  Grindingteeth 15:04, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, eat as notable as Milano and that has its own article. pschemp | talk 01:35, 15 October 2006 (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.