Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blink Me


 * 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 Speedy delete as blatant advertising. The growing consensus here is also clear. Kevin (talk) 00:18, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Blink Me

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable, unreleased youtube video, fails WP:N among others. See this diff for creator's comment about sources. ukexpat (talk) 21:37, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.   -- ukexpat (talk) 21:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.   -- ukexpat (talk) 21:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, preferably speedy. Only relevant ghit is Wikipedia ; only source given in the article is a forum, and I can't be arsed registering to the site to see if it's even legit. If not a hoax, then stunningly non-notable. PC78 (talk) 21:48, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - I tried an ignore all rules speedy but it was declined. – ukexpat (talk) 21:59, 7 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete, "unofficial" (read:unauthorized) tribute to a band on youtube. Doesn't quite fit any speedy categories, but it is utterly unsourcable, and attempting to use Wikipedia to gain notability.  Bye bye.  Keeper    76  21:49, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - Wikipedia is not a crystal ball ... Happy Editing! &mdash;  21:51, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete No reliable sources found. Video doesn't even exist. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 21:55, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * This Documentery Is Currently Underway and No Websites Have Been Opened Yet That contain any Clues. This Information Was Given To Me by The Author And Clips Will be Appearing On Youtube In About 4 Weeks. So needless to say, my search fro reliable, verifiable sources was unavailing. This does not look like the type of prodcucer where notability would be a foregone conclusion. I turned down the chance to speedy by IAR. In light of this article being the first introduction of the subject to the public, going with speedy deletion under G11. Dloh  cierekim  22:03, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:RS and nom. Cliff smith  talk  22:10, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - Doesn't meet basic notability guidelines per and . The fact that the only mention in the latter is Wikipedia itself is rather telling. Likewise, the article is written in such a manner that strongly suggests that it will not receive widespread coverage in media outlets, books, film, TV etc..etc..   Wisdom89  ( T |undefined  /  C ) 23:52, 7 August 2008 (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.