Deletion of Original Chicken Sandwich

Comment: adequate sources and information is provided to establish notability. Contrary to the nomination, this is not a sales catalog (or at least I found no way to place an order for a BK Stacker). "Cruft" is just a shorthand excuse for deletion that basically translates directly as . All of the other issues raised in the nomination (e.g. ) are most appropriately addressed by editing, not by deletion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT||WP:PEACOCK)

Comment: I agree with Jerem43's point about all of these sandwiches meeting the 4 inclusion standards he references from  and with Richard Arthur Norton's comments about AfD not being an appropriate forum for dealing with matters of cruft, especially when the intended result of this nomination seems to be a merger into the "list of..." article. I could see there being a case for some of the lesser-known products to maybe be merged until they have some work done, but most of these food items (especially the TenderCrisp, Croissan'Wich, Orig. Chicken Sandwich, and Chicken Tenders) the sail past notability guidelines with ease. These articles should be tagged for sources, improvement, and expansion as needed and have the info boxes improved and, maybe some of them like the baguettes and Stacker should be slapped with a merge tag and have it discussed on talk pages. Overall, though, Wikipedia is better for having NPOV articles on popular products from international FF outlets
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTE)

Comment: I forgot to add that myself, I knew that the Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions has a specific tag for that: . - Jeremy
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:ITSCRUFT)