- 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. Shimeru (talk) 23:08, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
AfDs related to discussion for this article:
- Double Digits (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article is about a pricing game that was played on The Price is Right over a period of only 28 days 37 years ago. Article is not notable, completely unsourced and contains original research. Also, article topic already covered in List of The Price Is Right pricing games article. Nomination follows similar discussions in related AFDs Sottolacqua (talk) 13:27, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. —Sottolacqua (talk) 13:31, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong delete Very-short-lived pricing game; consensus is that no pricing game is individually notable. Absolutely no possible secondary sources. Ridiculous. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 22:26, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge Merge the information to the proper article and redirect. Mr. C.C.Hey yo!I didn't do it! 23:36, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- What the hell is there to merge? Every single sentence that isn't already mentioned in the list is pure OR. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 00:50, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Take a pill their Hammer. No need to get like that. I could vote keep if you really wanted. But I am not going to. Why? There is no point to it. WP:GETOVERIT! Mr. C.C.Hey yo!I didn't do it! 03:05, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - There's nothing to merge. CynofGavuf 21:39, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - entirely unreferenced, and most likely unreferencable - I can't find any coverage of it in reliable sources. Robofish (talk) 23:28, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - no indication of existence of any reliable sources to verify the article's content, also notability issues with a single pricing game that hasn't been played in 37 years. RJaguar3 | u | t 03:04, 13 April 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.