Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nutz (2nd nomination)

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 delete. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 15:47, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nutz

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

Did my best BEFORE search but can't find any indication this is a notable brand in and of itself. Google, GBooks, Gnews, Highbeam, JSTOR pretty much all have nothing. There's one book on GBooks that mentions this brand but exclusively in the context of the Colbert Report, and one source isn't enough for GNG.

For full disclosure: I did revert a good-faith attempt to redirect this to Nut because I don't think that's what anyone searching for Nutz will be looking for. However, I'm not opposed to a redirect somewhere instead of deletion if that's what the consensus is. Result of previous AfD was merge & redirect to Colbert Report. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:02, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:57, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Redirect to Nut (A disambiguation page) due to the common usage of adding a z to a word to make it soundz coolz manz. and because I can't think of anywhere else to point it. Dysklyver 22:06, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades of Godric^{On leave} 17:39, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not enough evidence in my view to establish significant notability. Kind Tennis Fan (talk) 02:19, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:16, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Doesn't seem to have enough reliable sources that discuss it in depth, thus making it fail our general notability guidelines. RileyBugz ^会話 _投稿記録 20:57, 3 November 2017 (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.