Deletion of Turtle Wax

Comment: Why wasn't  performed ? .... Anyway meets GNG
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)

Comment: per .  It's trivially simple to see thousands of references to this product all over the place. Given that the nom's deletion reason is simply the current state of referencing, and even acknowledges that this is a notable product, I'd suggest '''Speedy Keep
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NEXIST)

Comment: now appears to be notable per . —&nbsp;Preceding Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned comment added by
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: The topic passes . Also keep per , because |notability is based on the ''existence'' of suitable sources, ''not'' on the state of sourcing in an article. Source examples include, but are not limited to those listed below
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:NEXIST||WP:N)