Talk:Malt-O-Meal

	This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Brands This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles

There has been a significant amount of strange edits going on to this article for a very long time... Actual corporate spam, accusations of corporate spam, vandalism, scores of unsourced edits, and the one constant throughout: a very poorly written article. I have gone ahead and stubbed the article, and protected it. Whenever it gets unprotected, and it won't be any time soon, any new material will need sourcing. Period. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 00:57, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If there isn't any more gratuitous "non-advertising" material suitable for publishing, then this stub should be re-directed to the

Malt-O-Meal_Company.AnimeJanai 19:52, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

One article is about the breakfast cereal, the other about the company that makes it. BartBee 02:37, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{editprotected}}

Please move this article from "stub" to "food-product-stub". Dr.frog 16:08, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Hut 8.5 19:25, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{

}} Article is and has been locked for editing by sysops only for a period exceeding one month; no edits, meaningful or otherwise, have or can be made. Before article was “stubbed”, content addressed the Malt-O-Meal Company. This content is now present in the unprotected article, . I suggest this article, Malt-O-Meal, be converted to a redirect page until such time, if any, as the “Company article” grows to warrant content forking to address products marketed as “Malt-O-Meal”. I would have no issue leaving the resulting redirect protected.

In the article’s current state, however, the image used in the infobox does not have a fair-use rationale for this article. The remaining sentence, further, does not assert importance/relevance. The article, therefore, may also be subject to speedy deletion per CSD A7. Ɛƚƈơƅƅơƚɑ _talk 19:50, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've unprotected the article as no discussion concerning the dispute has occurred. --- RockMFR 20:22, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]