Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blue Charge


 * 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   redirect to Cott.  Sandstein  06:17, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Blue Charge

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Contested PROD; Unsourced; Not even a claim to notability. —  Jeff G. ツ  18:02, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Well known brand in the United Kingdom and justifies its existence through its notoriety- will look for sourcing on the internet.- 19:07, 12 August 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edit.James.Dawson.Wiki (talk • contribs)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 02:03, 13 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - According to this, it's just a supermarket specific branding for a Cott product. I can find no significant coverage about the product to establish notability. - Whpq (talk) 16:55, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BusterD (talk) 22:32, 19 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge/Redirect to Cott per the information provided by Whpq. --MelanieN (talk) 00:43, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Just another product on the shelf... -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 18:06, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge to Red Rooster (drink) as that is what the source says it is. It is effectively a redirect to Cott with perhaps a short comment that ASDA sold it as Blue Charge.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time ' 00:56, 27 August 2011 (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.