Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boo Koo

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was NO CONSENSUS. Postdlf 04:38, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Boo Koo
Back-o-the-Can text (or website copyvio? will check) but even so non-notable promo/ad thing. Master Thief Garrett 09:58, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, any company that can get Shaquille O'Neal to endorse its drinks is notable. Kappa 15:16, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * keep, real energy drink. Kappa 23:23, 1 May 2005 (UTC), informative article, useful example of its type. Kappa 22:38, 6 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep or merge if not a copyvio. Meelar (talk) 17:45, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, I typed it all out without copying directly from anything, and I state that I got extra information from their website (without copying straight from) and the can. Which part of my article is copyright violation? The part that I wrote myself? The nutritional information? You're a bit delete-happy I think. Mrd00d
 * Delete. 236 unique Google hits for "Boo Koo" +drink.  Let's not create articles based on who gets paid millions of dollars to endorse their products.  RickK 21:34, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Search "BooKoo Energy" or "Boo Koo Energy" then you would only get 85 page results. I tried to find proof if Shaq is really promoting their product. I can't find it on Google. The only website that I'm getting is Bevnet saying that Shaq is promoting it. --Chill Pill Bill 22:13, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable, promo. Megan1967 04:51, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Energy drink. Klonimus 07:04, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete promo for commercial product with no notability established. If S O'Neal is proven to have endorsed the product, that adds no encyclopedic relevance, in which case my vote will remain delete.  Barno 15:17, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Just a question. How is this a promo for a non-notable thing. How is this a promo? Are you putting up deletion notices for the other energy drinks listed? No. They aren't promos, they are encyclopedic articles detailing what these drinks are. These drinks are all known. These drinks are all popular. And they are all real. What is the relevance of it being endorsed by Shaq or not? It is a popular drink. It didn't have an article made yet, and now there is one. This isn't a promo, it is an informative article on a drink. Mr d00d! 21:22, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
 * keep it too please Yuckfoo 00:35, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Any particular reason why? -- Hoary 03:16, 2005 May 5 (UTC)
 * We read that it is mainly consumed by those people wanting to get extra hours into their day. Rather than "those people", how about "gullible people"? Oh, but then it would diverge from the company line. In effect if not intention, a promo. Merge anything notable within and redirect to Energy drink. -- Hoary 03:16, 2005 May 5 (UTC)
 * Your vote is valid, of course, but I am curious why it should be merged to the energy drink page. Should the rest of the energy drinks that are linked to from the main energy drink page going to be merged as well? If yes, merge it. If not, leave them all on their own individual pages. Is it necessary to do these things on a case by case basis? Do with one drink as is done with the rest. It is given a separate page because there are separate pages for many other energy drinks. Mr d00d! 04:07, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
 * P.S. If you don't like it as is, why don't you edit it so that it is valid and neutral, non-promo. I see it as neutral, and not a promo, so maybe someone else should fix it up so that it fits people's needs without needing to merge it for no reason. Mr d00d! 04:07, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, I tend to think these all these so-called energy drinks are just minor variations on a (snake-oily) theme, and could all be merged into Energy drink. Unless, that is, there's something about these drinks (either in general or in particular) that has escaped me. I can't easily add to the article, even if I wanted to, as I've never heard of the stuff. There seems to be an assumption that the reader is in some nation where dollars are used; I'm not (we use yen here), and though I'm vaguely aware of a few so-called "energy"/"sports" drinks here (notably the divinely named "Pocari Sweat"), I really don't think that this one is for sale here. What I think is encyclopedic is medical and similar info (see this for example). Or again, the main article says energy drinks today are commonly associated with the image of a hacker or IT professional, sitting up late at his computer trying to stay awake. This is not an entirely inaccurate picture; if somebody who's interested in "energy drinks" has the, uh, energy to write more, how about a clarification of this (to me) extraordinarily woolly statement? (Does it mean "Much of the sales of energy drinks are to people who want to stay awake and alert", and if not, what does it mean?) Incidentally, the "energy drinks" sold in the Czech Republic have more explosive names. -- Hoary 05:03, 2005 May 5 (UTC)
 * Yes I did notice the dollar values it gives. I suppose if it said "USD$" or similar that would be OK.
 * No I doubt you'd find this product over there. I looked around here (in NZ) and other than being swamped in Red Bulls and Vs, there's no Boo Koo.
 * Does Pocari Sweat actually *taste* like sweat, or is it just a horrendous Engrish misnomer? I've always wondered that since my Golden Axe days... hehehe... Master Thief Garrett 23:32, 5 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Red Bull Super Charged Delete. Patent nonsense. Unsupported medical claims. Vanity page. Commercial page. Not encyclopedic. Not factual. Not notable. Not wikified. Copyvio. Creator registered on wiki for sole purpose of creating this page. Probable sock. Spammed my email inbox, too. &mdash; Xiong &#29066; talk *  06:16, 2005 May 5 (UTC)


 * Keep But it needs major improvement or rewriting. Why delete it when it is a real product. The article needs to be improved, thats all. --Munchkinguy 18:47, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
 * The product is real, but is it notable? "Boo Koo" gets ~85 Google hits. "Red Bull Energy Drink", a rather narrow keyword to use, still gets 19,400 hits. Master Thief Garrett 23:32, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
 * It's misspelled. Searching for "BooKoo" or "BooKoo energy drink" would be a better comparison. FreplySpang (talk) 23:54, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Still the same, page result numbers "86 for "BooKoo energy drink" --Chill Pill Bill 19:34, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep It's a real drink, why not have it up?Xyphon 04:16, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Why delete it when it is a real product. -- Is this a door we really wish to open? We cannot get rid of the fancruft. Do we want an article for every can, jar, box, and bottle on the aisle at the local supermarket? &mdash; Xiong &#29066; talk * 08:27, 2005 May 6 (UTC)
 * Also note the first edit Xyphon has ever done is a vote for this. --Chill Pill Bill 19:36, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

It is spelled "Boo Koo" if you are looking at the website or can. Maybe the other websites cant spell. Xiong, I didnt mean to send you an email, sent it to the wrong person. One message isnt spam. It is factual, it isnt commercial because im not with them or advertising, no medical claims are made, and not a copyvio. Those are all the ones Im bothering to adress. Mr d00d! 04:19, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Not factual -- non-notable, commercial, fraudulent, and a patently nonsensical medical claim. And yes, one single instance of Sales, Promotion, Advertising, Marketing = SPAM. Perhaps it is not a copyvio -- if you are the copyright holder of the can label. Almost certainly a violation of federal Pure Food and Drug Act. &mdash; Xiong &#29066; talk * 08:43, 2005 May 6 (UTC)

Explain the nonsensical medical claim, and if you mean "energy stimulance", then you better argue with all the other drinks. Which makes no sense. Also, my email wasn't SPAM because I didnt market anything. I sent an email to you ACCIDENTALLY thanking you for your KEEP vote, but you probably hadnt even seen this page yet. I went to someone's talk page and saw your email there, and assumed it was that persons, because it just said "email me here". I didnt advertise the page or promote it to you, I mistakenly sent you a message that you werent meant to get. You are wrong, sir. And are all people that get nutritional information from a food product, and list a slogan, violating a copyright? No. You are being unreasonable. You are wrong.Mr d00d!

Since its been way more than 5 days, Im removing the up for deletion notice, especially since there are more keep votes. Mr d00d! 05:33, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Do not remove vfd notices--nixie 05:35, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Why not? Kappa 07:50, 12 May 2005 (UTC)


 * It seems like after 12 days, they havent succeeded to delete it, so they want to extend the deadline or something. I don't really know. It's 7 days over! Mr d00d! 17:39, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Sometimes they take a while to close things, it's not a conspiracy. Kappa 18:37, 12 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Seems that way sometimes! Hahahaha.... Mr d00d! 00:08, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Quick eyeball tally 7 to 5 keep -- not an overwhelming endorsement. If I were a deletionist, I'd be angry; it does look like this bit of commercial advertising will survive -- for now. &mdash; Xiong &#29066; talk * 03:22, 2005 May 13 (UTC)
 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.