Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coca-Cola Fright

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedily deleted under CSD A1/A3 (no context). --Mr. Lefty (talk) 20:16, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Coca-Cola Fright

author deleted prod, non-notable future movie. 'Nuff said... SkerHawx 19:22, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Comment additionally, I believe that this user is a sock puppet of User:Hanna Films (see also User:Hannafilm, but I've never completed a request before. Can someone assist? SkerHawx 19:38, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

What is wrong? --Drivecrazy 19:26, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

There is nothing wrong with this article.--Drivecrazy 19:26, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Absolutely no Google hits, once you factor out Wikipedia entries[1] (with Wikipedia results, you get a staggering one entry). Given the author's contributions, this is a clear violation of WP:COI. EVula 19:28, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
  Speedy Delete and Protect From User:Lucky 6.9's logs: "9:32, October 20, 2006 Lucky 6.9 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Coca-Cola Fright" (NOnsense, empty taxobox)". Good find, Alan. EVula 20:01, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - Wikipedia's not a crystal ball Torinir _{( Ding my phone My support calls E-Support Options )} 19:29, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - fails WP:Notability, and the "small company" that is making this movie was speedily deleted from wikipedia.

Speedy Delete - Is a recreation of a deleted article which Lucky 6.9 just deleted today, and it fails WP:Notability.
Alan^{Talk - Contributions} 19:50, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. I was the prodder, but it's all been said above. Sandstein 19:47, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above, but speedy deletion does not apply because this page has never been taken through AfD before. --Mr. Lefty (talk) 20:03, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
• Actually, this could probably be speedied under A1 or A3, so that's what I'll be doing. --Mr. Lefty (talk) 20:15, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Pretty sure I'm reading this correctly:
    CSD G4: "This clause does not apply if the only prior deletions were speedy or proposed deletions, although in this case, the previous speedy criterion, or other speedy deletion criteria, may apply".
    As it was speedily deleted once, wouldn't it still be up for speedy deletion? EVula 20:09, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Only if it meets the same speedy deletion criterion, which in this case, it actually might. I think you could get away with speedying this under CSD A1 or A3. --Mr. Lefty (talk) 20:15, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.