Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Your coke

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 of the debate was Delete. --JoanneB 14:34, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Your coke

Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Article apparently about an uncompleted film by two USC students that was "halted in the late summer of 2003" and "slated to continue in the summer of 2006 and is expected in limited release." No references. Not easy to verify. No evidence presented of encyclopedic significance at this time. Not listed in imdb. No evidence presented that "Your coke" is an idiom in any widespread use. Nominator votes delete. After it is finished, released, listed in imdb, and reviewed by major reviewers, we could have an article about it. Dpbsmith (talk) 02:36, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

• Delete looks rather like vanity also. Mark K. Bilbo 02:55, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Oh, I forgot. And vanity, too. Dpbsmith (talk) 10:57, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as per above --Martyman-(talk) 03:17, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete adding to the suspicions of vanity is the fact that IP of the creator of the page is located near USC. Peyna 03:26, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete —Brim 04:11, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. "Your coke" isn't even the name of the incomplete student film per the article, just a neologism from it. --Metropolitan90 04:44, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per everyone else. — JIP | Talk 08:51, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
• Strong Delete - my eyes are tired from wading through google to try to justify this one. It sounded like a maybe with the article, but then again, when you think about it, like a film that has not yet been made, that has a 1 in 1 billion chance of being notable (its by a bunch of students), and then in turn we are talking about a slang term that only the 4 people making the film used. I try my best to justify keeping an article, but this one just doesn't cut it. Zordrac 10:00, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
  • I think it's an obvious delete, but I don't quite think it meets the criteria for speedy delete or I would have done so. Dpbsmith (talk) 10:59, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete neologism. --Bachrach44 20:09, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Preaky 23:35, 1 December 2005 (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.