Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Top Totty


 * 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.  Sandstein  18:26, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Top Totty

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable product which briefly appeared in the news in 2012 because it was sold in the House of Commons and there was an objection to its name. The relevant information is contained in Slater's Ales, so a redirect to that article would be acceptable (a redirect has been tried and reverted). Unless a product is particularly notable, we follow the guidelines WP:Product, WP:ORGCRIT and WP:ORGDEPTH (which indicates that non-notable awards - such as the regional SIBA awards - are trivial coverage), and write about the product within the company article. The article on this product relates to a temporary news item - relevant guidelines on how we deal with temporary news items are WP:EVENTCRITERIA, Notability, and WP:SUSTAINED. The product in this case is almost a side issue, as it is merely the name that caught attention, and the product could have been a sandwich called Top Totty sold in the House. SilkTork (talk) 09:50, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 10:23, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 10:23, 14 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep There are too many policies quoted in this nomination. The beer clearly meets the key one which is GNG by having significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. It can't be merged into the brewer's article as it is too large. The episode raises questions of casual sexism in consumer culture, censorship, and the role of the role of the media that make the subject worthy of a stand-alone article. I note it was the subject of a DYK in 2015. While not determinative, non-notable subjects rarely make it through the DYK process on to the front page without someone AFDing them. Philafrenzy (talk) 13:12, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep All of those other policies do not apply, as the article clearly meets WP:GNG. It is too large compared to the possible redirect target, Slater's Ales, to be merged into it. Edwardx (talk) 13:50, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Clearly meets GNG with sufficient reliable 3rd party sources. Plus the article talks about the industry awards that it won and it's time in the bar prior before the press found out about it and it's amusing name. There is much more to this than just the synthetic outrage created at the time which caused a rise in publicity.  The C of E God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 20:14, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep The topic is notable. For example, see Drinking Dilemmas.  And notability does not expire. Andrew D. (talk) 21:13, 14 June 2018 (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.