Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Candy cane
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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, nominator pretty much withdrew judging by comment at bottom and consensus called for a keep anyway. Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 22:53, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The tag says it all. It doesn't desrve an article as it doesn't cite any references or have any sources.Maybe redirect to Candy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by IslaamMaged126 (talk • contribs)
- Speedy Keep. "It doesn't deserve an article" is not a deletion rationale. And lack of references is not a reason for deletion unless something cannot be verified to exist. This almost 5 year old article can be easily referenced. --SmashvilleBONK! 22:25, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep This isn't even close. Sources and citations should be easy to come by, and probably once were there, but deletion is not the remedy. Jacksinterweb (talk) 22:32, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- If redirect to candy, maybe there would be a better chance of good sources there?IslaamMaged126 (talk) 22:34, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Keep and close due to WP:SNOW. This can easily be fixed with sourcing, and how does something so closely associated with the Christmas season for years not deserve an article? Mr Senseless (talk) 22:35, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I just added 3 sources. Which I easily found. Google news has 1,863 hits for "candy cane" in the last day. And yes, some of those are things named after the candy cane...but...the fact that they are named after it makes it notable. --SmashvilleBONK! 22:39, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Now speedy keep because of Smashville.IslaamMaged126 (talk) 22:40, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.