Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caffenol
Even though I was the one who PRODed the article as non-notable since it had no refs then and I could find none at that time, it has since been twice re-written and sources added since. I have just completely gone over the sources and removed all the blogs, forums and other  junk and also combined paras, removed meaningless wording and generally cleaned it up. Since it does have a couple of reliable sources now I believe it should be kept as it meets  now. The Williams academic paper is reliable, but it is troubling that while it deals with caffeine-based developing it does not use the term caffenol at all in the paper
— User:Ahunt, 13:36, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:SPS||WP:GNG (Wikipedia:Verifiability)