Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grim Babies


 * 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. Lankiveil (speak to me) 13:21, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Grim Babies

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

Not very notable, sources are mostly blogs and poor quality, with only one semi-related news article fluff piece. Article was arguably created for marketing purposes originally. Gigs (talk) 20:00, 22 March 2009 (UTC) 
 * Delete non-notable game item. We don't even have an article on prim baby, which this is supposedly a "parody" of, and neither are notable. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  20:24, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete It is non-notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moggiethemeow (talk • contribs) 22:39, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 00:23, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete nn -- samj in out 12:39, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton  Talk  ·  Review  00:06, 27 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. Second Life cruft. Pburka (talk) 01:06, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. I think I'd have to agree with all of you.--Michael (talk) 02:59, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note According to the SFweekly.com site, the blog is maintained by one of its journalists, which would make it a reliable source. (Being a blog is only a bad thing when authorship cannot be reliably established or when it can be the writer has no credentials.) It's probably not enough to support an article, but the idea that blogs can't be sources is widespread enough, that it needs debunking. - Mgm|(talk) 10:55, 27 March 2009 (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.