Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cronut


 * 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. § FreeRangeFrog croak 01:02, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Cronut

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This subject is manifestly unnotable per the tiny amount of unsubstantial coverage it's received in reliable independent sources. Possibly WP:TOOSOON, or flash in the pan irrelevance. Barney the barney barney (talk) 21:51, 29 June 2013 (UTC) Barney the barney barney (talk) 21:51, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Sir  Rcsprinter,  Bt  (chinwag)  @ 23:14, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:25, 29 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Though this food item may be a relatively new phenomenon originating in a New York City bakery, it has garnered more than sufficient attention in reliable sources across the United States and the article includes many of those sources. The article is clearly a work in progress, but the nom is itself "too soon," for an article started only two days ago. Geoff  Who, me? 23:08, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. LA Times, New York Times, so on so on.. what else does it need? I think it meets WP:GNG. -- &oelig; &trade; 03:55, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:NTEMP and because the topic passes WP:GNG. Northamerica1000(talk) 19:34, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. Mmmm. -- do  ncr  am  23:01, 4 July 2013 (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.