Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lo Salt

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 no consensus. MBisanz ^talk 01:59, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lo Salt

Notability is in question, so let's put it under scrutiny: it is a brand of salt. That's all it is. Not notable. Boshinoi (talk) 19:35, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not any different from salt substitutes, except perhaps the fact it's not entirely substitute. (Not to mention the fact that our body is susceptible to changes in our potassium levels much more than a change in sodium level)... - Mgm|^(talk) 23:06, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notable product, discussed in many places: [1][2][3] are just a few examples found in seconds of looking on Google. JulesH (talk) 00:00, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Spammy. No good references in article. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:42, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Note that this AFD was started by a banned user (Jarlaxle/Grawp or an imitator). NawlinWiki (talk) 12:39, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Even so, regardless of the banned user's intentions, now that I've looked at the article, and have done some research, I have issues with notability based on the content. Geoff (talk) 01:16, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non notable. A Google search turns up numerous bagel-chips recipes, numerous generic "lo salt" references and ad pages for the product. Geoff (talk) 01:09, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The poor sources you cite are irrelevant. What matters are the good sources such as those cited by Jules H above. Colonel Warden (talk) 13:09, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 23:45, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Close and delist AfD brought by banned user. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 01:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would have done that instead of relisting if there weren't 3 good faith "delete" arguments. When this is closed, the reviewing admin will simply ignore the nomination statement which is also "just a !vote" (sic). --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:57, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I brought that up in a recent AFD that I closed as a speedy keep (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Britain's Josef Fritzl and corresponding ANI thread. I was reverted due to a combination of already-established consensus to delete, ignoring the rules, and, the one I strongly disagree with, that banned users' edits should stay if they are constructive to the encyclopedia. MuZemike (talk) 04:32, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, banned nominator notwithstanding this just doesn't seem to have enough reliable sources. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 03:26, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep/merge There are plenty more sources out there but the article, being slight, might be best merged to Salt substitute. Colonel Warden (talk) 13:06, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - A brand named product that captures 84% of a country’s market share, as shown here by reliable - independent sources [4] [5] is pretty notable to me and falls within our notability guidelines. Likewise, as Colonel Warden pointed out, there are “…plenty more sources out there”, as noted above. Worst case scenario should be an article created for Klinge Foods, the manufacturer and only manufacturer in the UK specialized producer of potassium chloride, as noted here [6]and this peice be redirected there. ShoesssS ^Talk 16:36, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep. It does assert notability, I've heard the name plenty of times before. TopGearFreak 18:01, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Per Shoessss. — neuro^(talk) 23:59, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It seems like a nice little article that could use some copy editing. Yanksox (talk) 04:16, 8 December 2008 (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.