Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of products manufactured by The Hershey Company


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 17:58, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

List of products manufactured by The Hershey Company

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I'm not familiar with deletion policy, but this page along with a scores of products of this company is clearly promotional, not belonging to an encyclopedia. See also Template:Hershey's confectionery products. Netheril96 (talk) 16:23, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep descriptive npt promotional. Relevant encyclopedic  information about a major company.     DGG ( talk ) 19:07, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per DGG. --Arxiloxos (talk) 19:51, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:19, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:19, 31 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep: descriptive and usefull list. -MrFizyx (talk) 20:23, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep: Not promotional any more than List of Coca-Cola brands (which is only an alphabetical list and not nearly as organized) or List of Nestlé brands. Meets the criteria under WP:LISTPURP. Jeffrey Scott Maxwell (talk) 00:39, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Clearly encyclopedic. Just describing a list of products made by a major confection company is not promotional in and of itself. Steven Walling  00:15, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment What about those products in that template?--Netheril96 (talk) 01:10, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Templates ease navigation. Besides, this area is not for discussing templates (see Templates for discussion). -MrFizyx (talk) 03:15, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I mean those articles linked from the template. They are individual articles about products of that company, none of which has secondary sources to establish notability. Maybe they can merit a list, but tons of articles?--Netheril96 (talk) 04:10, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - The majority of the commentators have listed the reasons for keep, I agree with what has been posted already. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 05:51, 1 April 2011 (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.