Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LeBron's Lightning Lemonade

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 Delete. Yanksox 15:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] LeBron's Lightning Lemonade

Hoax. Totally made up nonsense. IronChris | (talk) 14:45, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as a non-notable product. The article is nonsense, but the bubble gum seems to exist. I reverted the nonsense from Bubblicious. Prolog 15:00, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - the product itself isn't an hoax (a google search [1] finds a good bit of information on the product), but it does fail WP:N and I suspect the quotes on that page are made up, so I say delete. --tgheretford (talk) 15:01, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect to Bubblicious. Lightning Lemonade is already listed on the Bubblicious page. Rest of the stuff on the page is brootal nonsense. Tubezone 16:47, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
  • I agree, we should redirect. IronChris | (talk) 17:29, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - It appears that there are no sources to the comments. Nothing worth merging. Chris Kreider 17:35, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Actually, quite a notable product as shown by the link above. I oppose a merge. --badlydrawnjeff talk 12:02, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: I've stubbed it and expanded the article a tiny bit with what we know as opposed to the silliness that was there before. --badlydrawnjeff talk 15:53, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Article makes no claims of notability; merge verifiable information to parent product if pertinent. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 17:03, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Note: Even after the great cleanup of this article by badlydrawnjeff, I don't think this article meets the criteria for notability. Please take a look at the criteria for products. IronChris | (talk) 16:21, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Multiple, non-trivial mentions? --badlydrawnjeff talk 16:36, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete what is notable about this particular lemonade compared to others?? --SunStar Net 12:22, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
  • The press coverage, the specific endorsement... --badlydrawnjeff talk 13:12, 2 November 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.