Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lady Pink (r)


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 05:30, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Lady Pink (r)

 * – (View AfD)

Based on the following web searches: the subject appears to lack significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject, and therefore doesn't comply with the general notability guideline. PhilKnight (talk) 13:45, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm hesitant - so weak keep . Coverage isn't extensive but and  are both WP:RS even if the specific articles may have credibility issues (the former is about a company, not a product and the latter reads like a reworded press release). In any case, if kept, this should be moved to Lady Pink (energy drink) and a disambig notice should be added to Lady Pink (or a disambig page could be set up). Usrnme h8er (talk · contribs) 16:42, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi Usrnme h8er, the links you posted are press releases, if you scroll to the very end of the page it either says 'press releases' or gives a link for 'more press releases'. PhilKnight (talk) 18:10, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * True, the sheer amount of press release material out there actually fooled me. changing my !vote to weak delete - there is some stuff, but it's mostly references in stock speculation discussions - nothing that seems to meet RS criteria. Usrnme h8er (talk · contribs) 08:47, 17 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Outside content was added to include the percentage of caffeine compared to other energy drinks. Less like a promotional page with retailers removed.  As additional outside sources become available additional information can be entered. I think the page should be kept.Gumby945 (talk) 00:20, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Even following your extensive editting of the page the page still lacks verifiable reliable sources which means that wikipedia "should not have an article on it" (quote, reliable source policy, linked above). Usrnme h8er (talk · contribs) 14:39, 18 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I apologize if I am not doing this correctly as it is my first time creating an article. I would like to ask if the problem is concerning Lady Pink drink or the company itself. I have contacted the Director of the company to obtain some further information and he indicated that he will be getting back to me. If the problem relates to the product, it is listed on As well research was done by  The Company was involved in a motorcycle race which is profiled in  Bionic Tonic is also manufactured by Bionic Products. The company has an active listing on Nevada Secretary of State  I hope this is satisfactory as most of the information online is investment related. I plan to change Lady Pink (r) to Lady Pink Energy Drink but I discovered that I would need to wait 4 days before changing the name and adding a picture of the product. I appreciate your patience in guiding me through the process. Sincerely, Aanubisu (talk) 02:42, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:03, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete I don't see any evidence of wp:notability. None. ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:44, 21 February 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.