Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Largest and smallest won amounts (Deal or No Deal UK)


 * 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   No Deal. The Bushranger One ping only 00:38, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Largest and smallest won amounts (Deal or No Deal UK)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Pure trivia. Unverifiable outside citing the episodes in question. Currently unsourced. tl;dr: Fancruft. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 18:50, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  — &mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 21:16, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  — &mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 21:16, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  — &mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 21:17, 29 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete as effectively unsourced. This article appears to have been spun out of Deal or No Deal (UK game show); to the extent that it can be sourced, it ought to be spun back into that article. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 21:34, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete- this is an indiscriminate list of trivia. Reyk  YO!  00:30, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - I'm almost speechless. How can anybody consider this to be an encyclopaedic topic? The mind boggles. --Mais oui! (talk) 02:43, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - pretty trivial, although some of the content (i.e. largest winner) could be on the main UK series article, unless it already is. Bob talk 16:47, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Perhaps rename it an episode list. Nothing much happened in each episode other than who won and how much.   D r e a m Focus  01:06, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * delete pure trivia no encyclopedic value, why would anyone want to find out smallest amounts won? I'd like to see the inclusionists argue for this one. LibStar (talk) 04:38, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * keep, it's no less trivial then say an article listing video game characters, and they're apparently acceptable. Should keep and simply build on the missing sources to bring it to a higher quality. Robo37 (talk) 18:04, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a reason for keeping. LibStar (talk) 11:02, 4 October 2011 (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.