Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eazy az 1 2 3


 * 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   delete. -- Cirt (talk) 04:44, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Eazy az 1 2 3

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Growing precedent that pricing games are not individually notable. All of this has been unsourced since 2007 with no reputable sources forthcoming. Blatant violation of WP:OR, WP:V. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 17:03, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:06, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Surely a subgame within a game show can't be individually notable enough for an article can it? That seems insane to me. Unless there is an RS source that tracks the coming and going of these subgames then there is no way to verify this. Even spelling the name right wouldn't help. ;-) As I see it, if it can be verified as existing then it can be listed (very briefly) either in a list of subgames or in The Price Is Right (U.S. game show). If not, it shouldn't be in Wikipedia at all. People looking to document the trivial minutiae of their favourite shows should look to set up a separate fan Wiki for that. --DanielRigal (talk) 18:20, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete – Fails notability, already covered in List of The Price Is Right pricing games, entirely unsourced and article title is even spelled wrong. Sottolacqua (talk) 20:59, 15 March 2010 (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.