`  *Sorry but nonsense. There is only one source who says ``Nocciolini``, all the other institutional sources say ``Nocciolini di Canzo`` or ``Nocciolini (Canzo)``, ``Noccioli - Canzo`` or similar (look also - in addiction to the already said - (Official touristic site of Comunità Montana)). And also the only source who says ``Nocciolini`` without Canzo has an OFFICIAL correspondant in the decree of Region Lombardy who says ``Nocciolini - Canzo``. That's not an interpretation, but only the comparison between two official documents. The Google search experiment goes as you say precisely because ``nocciolini`` is a term used for many things. Please look at the first result of the search ``Nocciolini cookie``! You can see the picture, they are a cookie, but totally different from the cookies we are talking about!. If you obtain ``only`` 1700 with ``Nocciolini cookie|biscuit Canzo`` you don't surprise me, because ``Nocciolini di Canzo`` are unknown out of western Lombardy! All the other results you had excluding the word ``Canzo`` refer to other topics, and that's a confirmation that the complete nomination ``Nocciolini di Canzo`` is absolutely necessary. Wikipedia Article title policy says to observe the criteria of recognizability, naturalness, precision, conciseness, consistency. The omission of ``di Canzo`` is against recognizability (as I said, but I see that you didn't pay attention to it, there are also Nocciolini di Chivasso in Italy, in the region of Piedmont, another cookie), naturalness (all in western Lombardy say ``Nocciolini di Canzo``, and when they say ``Nocciolini`` it's only because we are already talking about the town of Canzo), precision (you aren't precise if you use a vague term of Italian language, whose meaning is ``little hazelnuts``, to define ONE of the at least three pastries I saw on Google made with hazelnuts; we, native consumers and ``caller`` of the Nocciolini di Canzo, perceive the matter in this way: Nocciolini is a common noun, but with the precisation ``di Canzo``, it refer to a specific product; different case with Panettone, because on Italian dictionaries ``Panettone`` means one thing, the one of Milan: that's not a common noun). Evidently you can't use the criterium of conciseness in this case, because first of all comprehensibility is required!  Regarding your accusation of insult, I didn't have intention to make insults. I was only laughing because the effect of the action you propose would be very funny for an Italian speaker. And I was explaining - as I see also FoCuSandLeArN recognized - that it would be a big error from the point of view of recognizability and precision. I synthetize that the title of this article must precise not only that we are talking about a cookie, but also that we are talking about ``this`` cookie.   `