Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. Nut


 * 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. Eluchil404 (talk) 09:33, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Dr. Nut

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Real historical product, possibly popular, not notable. Other than this brief piece on a regional website, there is no significant coverage outside of a mention in a novel and a few fan pages. ▫  Johnny Mr Nin ja  09:30, 23 February 2012 (UTC) 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 01:21, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisting comment: AfD failed to be properly substed. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 01:21, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete If not even the company that produced the drink is WP:NOTABLE, then the drink itself probably isn't either. — JmaJeremy  talk contribs  02:48, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. For the moment I'd just like to clarify that it's not "a mention in a novel", it's a repeated comic motif in the Pulitzer-Prize winning comic epic A Confederacy of Dunces, the greatest of all books about New Orleans, and it is used to such great effect that Dr. Nut has become something of a talisman of old New Orleans.  Whether that can be established in "reliable sources" remains to be seen.--Arxiloxos (talk) 04:31, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Can't find any reliable news sources here. Minima  ©  ( talk ) 09:11, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:46, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions. Arxiloxos (talk) 16:09, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep Found (and added) a book reference in a management tome about the 1977 attempted re-launch of the brand as mentioned in the article. May be enough to establish notability. Geoff  Who, me?  22:18, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - The article has references and sources. This was a significant, albeit regional, beverage - similar to Moxie. Article should be expanded rather than deleted. J. Van Meter (talk)
 * Keep This was a national brand from the 1920s through the late 1960s, and in that time was clearly culturally notable as a New Orleans icon. I suspect most coverage will be not easily accessable online, which isn't surprising as it hasn't been on the market for decades before the web existed.  At the risk of sounding a bit WP:OTHERSTUFF, we have at least two articles on soft drinks that lasted 6 years each, and another one that lasted just two years and never even went national, and don't forget this one that didn't even last a year.  All these are reasonably good articles, and I'm sure we can manage a decent article for a national brand with decades of history as well. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  03:59, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, per Starblind. This was part of the nom's Soft Drink Purge nominations.  See Articles for deletion/Solo (Norwegian soft drink).--Milowent • hasspoken  14:31, 8 March 2012 (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.