Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Burbank (Drinking Game)

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. Tone 12:38, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Burbank (Drinking Game)

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

New article about a drinking game somebody made up. No evidence this is notable by WIkipedia standards. Jayron32 05:24, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article should be allowed to remain for a few reasons. One, both beer pong and flip cup were invented in similar fashion and released to the public for a larger pool of drinking games to be played by the public. This drinking game is an off shoot of both and therefore is legitimate as an Encyclopedia Entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Timdn720 (talk • contribs) 05:32, 23 August 2010 (UTC) — Timdn720 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
I concur with "Timdn720". This is a legitimate entry based on the scope and classification of the rules of the game. Users will find this information helpful and informative. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisccorry (talk • contribs) 05:47, 23 August 2010 (UTC) — Chrisccorry (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Completely legitimate game —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.173.218.22 (talk) 06:18, 23 August 2010 (UTC) — 76.173.218.22 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Keep As a definition of a game that is played at tail gates, parties, and the like. I do not believe this article should be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.98.60.253 (talk) 18:43, 23 August 2010 (UTC) — 38.98.60.253 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Delete Absolutely useless entry about a non-notable drinking game concocted by a couple of kids who hang out on Wikipedia. Sorry, not a good enough reason to have an article about it just because of two Wikipedia users who like to waste their time with this nonsense. Laval (talk) 07:10, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - yet another game made up by bored students, which will be forgotten about by Christmas. Can have an article if it ever gains significant coverage in independent reliable sources, which I be prepared to bet my life savings against -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:04, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete - Please. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 08:25, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete I can't even find the slighest reference to it online and have never heard of it. Maybe there is a drinking game forum or blog it can gain popularity in.--NortyNort (Holla) 11:39, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unlike beer pong and flip cup, this made-up hybrid isn't notable, and I'm not be1tting that it ever will be. Mandsford 12:38, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as Wikipedia is not for things made up one day. I know a drinking game too, but don't create an article for it. (User:Armbrust/The Snooker Drinking Game). Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 13:43, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fine I will publish a book and it will be on Wikipedia someday even if not now. I was trying to do people a favor. Introduced it to San Diego Chargers and Dallas Cowboys fans at the Preseason tailgate and they said "This is the best drinking game ever." It will be notable someday if not now. So if it fails as an article now I am okay with that, many ideas have been ahead of their time in our history and this might be one such case. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Timdn720 (talk • contribs) 17:01, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:31, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Don't publish your book - self-published = non-notable in the majority of cases. If you do get a real publisher to put it out, and it sells, we may have an article on it. In the meantime, this article is about a variant of beer pong (etc) which is not notable. Don't bother pushing it in blogs - we don't accept them as reliable evidence. "It will be notable someday if not now." See WP:CRYSTAL. Peridon (talk) 19:30, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
More Deletion Snow... Unwikified original essay... Carrite (talk) 23:14, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Doesn't come close to meeting the General Notability Guideline. First Light (talk) 04:23, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete You cannot be serious with this one. Regent of the Seatopians (talk) 23:42, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Apart from the provided ref in which I could not see any relevance to Burbank (perhaps I missed something), I couldn't find any other refs. I do not think it meets Wikipedia guidelines for notability. --Kudpung (talk) 01:23, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't miss anything. Both of them are refs to the alleged parents of this alleged 'game'. Peridon (talk) 20:06, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.