Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alpen (food)

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. Vanamonde (Talk) 23:59, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[]

Alpen (food)[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)

Doesn't seem very notable to me -- didn't find any GHITS for the cereal being discussed outside of manufacturer pages and product listings, and the one source (for the first sentence) is a link to the manufacturer's site. I would propose a merge with an article about Weetabix, but virtually none of the stuff in the article is sourced (and some of it is quite absurd). jp×g 02:12, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 03:40, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 03:40, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[]

Keep This has been a major brand for over 50 years and so, to me, is up there with Rice Krispies, Sugar Puffs and other famous breakfast cereals. There's obvious alternatives to deletion and so this is a cleanup issue, not a matter of deletion. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:03, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[]
- @Andrew Davidson: "Famous breakfast cereal" does not equal notability. Please provide sources or people are going to be very unlikely to take this !vote seriously. Hog Farm _Bacon 14:22, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[]

Weak keep or merge & redirect to Weetabix_Limited#Brands: I added a couple of sources about the origins of this product line and its market share, and removed some uncited strange stuff. There are other Marketing book texts which could be cited, and the one I added describes this as "the most successful non-American cereal product". That could point towards Keep; however the discussions of the brand tends to be in the context of a successful re-orientation by the Weetabix company, so I wonder if it may be better situated at the subheading in the company article? AllyD (talk) 14:35, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[]

Keep While I haven't edited on Wikipedia in several years, I wrote this article originally more than 15 years ago as part of trying to make Wikipedia a comprehensive encyclopedia about the world. I created this article along with Cheerios and other major cereal brands; this cereal is not the same as Weetabix. It is a common muesli cereal product consumed in the Anglophone world. This article needs cleanup, not deletion. (Thanks for bringing me out of Wiki-retirement, by the way.) poroubalous (talk) 15:20, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[]

Merge to Weetabix Limited#Alpen. Here's a paragraph devoted to an Alpen advertisement, in oddly enough, a book about the sexualization of culture. That, combined with the other stuff already in the article, is pretty weak. A good deal of the coverage I can turn up is product listings, recipes (including one from the 1970s involving rum!), and one old newspaper announcement that Alpen was part of a school supply list. Almost everything I can find is in relation to the manufacturer of this cereal, Weetabix. Since the Weetabix article includes a blank section for Alpen in its list of manufactured products, and the coverage that's been found is almost exclusively in connection with Weetabix, it makes the most sense to merge there. Hog Farm _Bacon 15:36, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[]

Keep The Irish Times 1, Good Housekeeping rates it 2, The Guardian 3 and quite a few other ... 4, 5 Lightburst (talk) 15:55, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[]

Keep. Exceptionally notable brand in the UK. Clearly encyclopaedic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:50, 15 October 2020 (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.