Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gini (soft drink)


 * 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 keep. North America1000 07:03, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Gini (soft drink)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A soft drink, no references (tagged as such since 2012), no attempt to assert notability. Sources were searched for, nothing turns up save advertisements, shopping sites, and mirrors of the Wikipedia article. Zaathras (talk) 21:47, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:51, 11 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment this is a very well-known soft drink here in France that's been around for nearly 50 years and I'm very surprised there aren't more sources even on the French page. I'll have a look around as from personal experience I would think they exist but will not !vote for the moment. --Dom from Paris (talk) 10:17, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep The drink was particularly well-known for it's ads in the early days and Pink Floyd was even featured in one in 1974 the brand is cited in a few books on advertising   . There is an indepth article on the brand in Strategies which is THE magazine about advertising in France. The Musée des Arts Décoratifs, Paris features one of its ads here with music written by and directed by Serge Gainsbourg. I'll add these sources to the article. --Dom from Paris (talk) 10:39, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment I've updated the article and added some more sources in addition to those cited above. The brand has a very "hot" image in France with its ads using innuendo and sexuality in liberal dashings. They have also used ex-adult entertainers as the face of the brand notably Clara Morgane i'll try and find a RS for that! --Dom from Paris (talk) 11:59, 12 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep The topic was prodded with the claim that there was "Zero assertion of notability" when the article plainly said that "It is well known in France..." This nonsense is repeated in the nomination and is blatantly erroneous. Andrew🐉(talk) 16:26, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Anyone can write anything into an article, the point is that there was no source to support that assertion. The article sat unsourced for years, and your lazy prod removal without even making a pass at addressing the problem was insulting and borderline disruptive. Zaathras (talk) 22:13, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It is true anyone can add anything into an article but your prodding rational was "zero assertion of notability" which as Andrew points out is false as the article states "It is well known in France". I would be tempted to say that your Prod was particularly lazy as well. I don't think it takes much imagination to suppose that a soft drink that has been around for 50 years has acquired enough notability to be in Wikipedia and that sources will exist. So maybe prodding is not a sensible approach because it is meant for uncontroversial deletion. On top of this the French language version does have some sources so even if you can't read French you can deduce that sources do in fact exist and the article needs improving instead of deleting. --Dom from Paris (talk) 08:33, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Also you may need to revise the definition of disruptive editing because as clearly stated in WP:DEPROD when deprodding "You are strongly encouraged, but not required, to also: ...Consider improving the page to address the concerns raised." (my bolding) You may consider Andrew as having been lazy but laziness is not in itself disruptive as long as guidelines and policy are respected which it was. And also if you feel insulted if someone removes your PROD I would strongly suggest not adding them because they get removed all the time. --Dom from Paris (talk) 08:50, 13 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep: Now the article has plenty of references that discuss the product, of which two are full-length articles about their marketing strategy. Passes the GNG. --Slashme (talk) 12:24, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:HEY. Would add that this is (now) exactly the kind of article that makes Wikipedia excellent: well-sourced details about things that initially appear unimportant, but when researched thoroughly can turn into great articles. Well done, everyone. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 14:17, 18 August 2020 (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.