Talk:Sugar drink

Confusingly disruptive contributions
New User:Vlflynn recently added (twice) a substantial amount of content to this page, which on a rough glance appears to contain relevant and cited materials, but the addition of which broke the page in several ways (removing categories and other useful tags, beginning the article with a ref tag before any content), and contained substantial amounts of serious spelling and grammar problems. I've reverted this both times now as I suspect the substantiative content is a WP:COPYVIO given the coarseness of the rest of edits, but I'd appreciate if Vlflynn could please explain himself here, and others could lend their opinion. I don't know enough about the subject to judge the substance of the edits, just their form. My apologies if I am just WP:BITEing a newcomer here. --Pfhorrest (talk) 03:53, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Delete?
I couldn't help but notice that this article has lacked cites for it's entire existence. In addition, a google search for "Sugar drink" reveals almost no examples for that complete term as a noun (though there are many examples of: "Sugary"-"drinks"; "High-sugar"-"drinks"; etc; but almost nothing referring to a specific "Sugar-drink"). And since the entire article only states that "Sugar drinks" exist, are high in sugar, include sodas and energy drinks, and that sodas and energy drinks may have negative health effects (which their respective articles already cover, with citations!), is there any reason for this article to continue to exist? 71.234.211.99 (talk) 23:51, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, further searches still reveal little about "Sugar drinks", so I trimmed most of the unreferenced material. Fell free to revert if referenced can be provided (especially for the Health aspects section). I still think that this is a good candidate for deletion, but I don't feel strongly enough to nominate it. 71.234.211.99 (talk) 18:59, 28 May 2012 (UTC)