- 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 of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 01:14, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Either a hoax or an obscure term that doesn't seem verifiable via Google. Original creator already carried out this dubious edit (note addition of "oddball"; hoax-like name and the figures are out of place in the list). Perhaps they went in the huff after I reverted their change of "candy" to "sweet", and decided to screw things up instead? Fourohfour 15:44, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. --Bachrach44 16:08, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete unsourced and unverified. Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] (W) AfD? 16:41, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete This sure seems like his own invention. Bergsten 16:57, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- A thin-up was actually a kind of sweet i had when i was younger, because my mam bought me them and they where impossible to chew so she gave them away. (Preceding unsigned comment from User:Sangajin, 09:37, 8 December 2005)
- Even if you *did* say "thin ups", doesn't mean the expression was in common use. Providing a number of links of its usage would back up your case more strongly. Or perhaps it's another name for a kind of sweet that already has its own article? Fourohfour 12:02, 8 December 2005 (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.