Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Mountain Dew flavors and varieties

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. Merge proposal can be considered separately via talk page etc. Daniel (talk) 14:25, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

List of Mountain Dew flavors and varieties[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

List feels very "cruft" / indiscriminate collection of information, and I feel notable information (ie. notable flavor variations) could best be represented in the main Mountain Dew article. AxoIotI (talk) 03:19, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. AxoIotI (talk) 03:30, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2021 January 13. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:45, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 08:35, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep The nomination feels like WP:CRUFTCRUFT and doesn't seem to be proposing deletion. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:08, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into main Mountain Dew article (and trim the fat). Vaticidalprophet (talk) 12:30, 13 January 2021 (UTC) After further review of the article and more background information (i.e. that it was split from the main article originally), changing !vote to keep. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 22:38, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Mountain Dew article. There is no reason for a seperate list article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:18, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Note that the above !vote was saved just 1 minute after the user's !vote in another AFD discussion. Sam Sailor 16:47, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - John is very active in AfD, so I wouldn't take that as anything suspicious myself -- I'd assume it's just a matter of having several tabs open at once. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 22:38, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Reasonably well-sourced list article. The list was split off from Mountain Dew, and I don't think it serves a good purpose for the ready to try and merge part or the whole back into the main article. Sam Sailor 16:43, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Trim & Merge to the main Mountain Dew article. Only the varieties that are actually notable in some way (i.e., actually are sourced to reliable, secondary sources) should actually be included here. Many, many of these variants have no sources describing them, and many of them are simply not notable enough to include (for example, variants that were test-marketed but never fully released, variants that were non-winning entrants in contests, etc.). When the vast amounts of non-sourced, non-notable information is trimmed out, the remainder describing the notable variants would be best integrated to the main article on the product, rather than being split into a separate list. Rorshacma (talk) 18:26, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Wouldn't fit in the main article, so a split off article is justified. Dream Focus 19:07, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, but get rid of the unsourced content, and give priority to the more notable flavours. Foxnpichu (talk) 21:33, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is very informative for all the fans and Mountain Dew history buffs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bufftbone (talk • contribs) 15:38, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NLIST. There is coverage of "Mountain Dew flavors" as a set, and there are some decent references for individual items. "Feels very cruft" is not a good deletion rationale. — Toughpigs (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2021 (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.