Talk:American Spirit

Deletion discussion
from VfD: Is this encyclopaedic? More to the point, is it even true? Deb 20:20, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. The page was only created today - I say give them a chance to expand it before nuking it. The brand passes the Google test anyway (528,000). David Johnson 21:32, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, as David Johnson's evidence suggests. &mdash; siro  &chi;  o  21:45, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep - it's certainly true that American Spirit tobacco (a) is pure tobacco, and (b) contains more of the nasty addictive nicotine than other commercial prepared cigarets. (I don't know what the numbers are for loose tobacco.) As far as the Kurt Russell reference, that's kinda pointless. But there's interesting stuff about the brand (and its parent company) that could be developed, including some FTC activity. --jpgordon{gab} 21:49, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * What the hell? It's mindless!  It's a famous brand, alright, and it's one of about 3 brands that were introduced by the Big Tobacco folks after the events of "The Insider":  They came out with "natural" cigarettes (i.e. those they hadn't tampered with).  It's not known for being something Kurt Russell smoked.  Sheesh.  An article on this subject is ok.  This article is dumb.  Send to clean up and cross our fingers. Geogre 22:05, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep and cleanup (do not merge). [[en:RaD Man|RaD Man (talk)]] 22:36, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * I've shortened and stubbed it. --jpgordon{gab} 23:52, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, agreeing with everyone (though understanding Deb's uncertainty). Samaritan 23:59, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Hope someone will come with more history.  I've seen these things in tobacco shops for a decade or more (well, not recently, since I'm now almost never in a tobacco shop).  They may have been made by an "independent division" of Reynolds American since 2002, but they're way older than that.  The thing about them was that they were always presented in marketing as being from an indie company, maybe even one owned by Native Americans, but were always rumoured to be a product of one of the big boys under a "false flag".  I don't think that much in the way of "truth in labelling" applied to tobacco products, other than the infamous warning label and tar and nicotine contents, at least until the "tobacco settlement".  Hope that someone will come up with facts and details.
 * Comment: Deb's uncertainty is understandable. One would need to be American and be, know, or date a smoker to have run across this.  Further, though, I would like to suggest a move to American Spirit cigarettes so as to avoid people looking for the ostensible spirit of America by this name. Geogre 01:37, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Agree with the move, and make this a disambiguation for this page and something like American exceptionalism. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 08:16, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. We are not a catalogue. --Improv 04:29, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Wikipedia is not a catalogue.  --[[User:GRider|GRider\talk]] 21:02, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Useful information for the curious, if 1) expanded a bit 2) moved to American Spirit cigarettes. And, for what it's worth, I am not a smoker, and I know about this from seeing it for sale here in Tokyo. --Calton 05:42, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge with the page about its company. CheeseDreams 22:53, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Cribcage 19:51, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. [[User:Squash|Squash (Talk) ]] 06:34, Nov 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. -Sean Curtin 22:23, Nov 28, 2004 (UTC)

end moved discussion

Disambig
As there are others I have this a disambiguation page. Note there may be two superheroes of the same name (neither with an entry) but I'm looking into it and will rework it or clarify at some point. (Emperor 19:22, 7 August 2007 (UTC))