Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of unfortunately-named Brands


 * 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. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 06:36, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

List of unfortunately-named Brands

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

Complete WP:OR and WP:SYN, extremely subjective.  RGTraynor  20:50, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Kill it with fire Original research. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 20:54,  25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately Created. Who defines "unfortunately-named" anyway? No real criteria (granted, much is obvious) but article isn't much more than trivial information about "funny" named products.  I agree it is original research as well (now) but even with sources, the article is fatally flawed for the inability to define the very name of the article itself.  P HARMBOY  ( TALK ) 22:24, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per all of the above: original research. Cliff smith  talk  00:32, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Trivia, only fit for BJAODN along with TheRapistFinder.com and Fücker Reisen. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 01:03, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Indiscriminite OR trivia page. Wikipedia is not Engrish.com. Doc StrangeMailbox Logbook 14:54, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Funny as hell, and I enjoyed snickering at several of the names. I wonder if it is sourceable? Jay Leno often presents similar unfortunalely named products originating in countries whee North American English is not spoken. As is, it is original research. Edison (talk) 19:15, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Most of those names were sourced.   RGTraynor  19:47, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete -- a bit of potty-humour? Ron B. Thomson (talk) 20:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Original research, very biased on an admittedly vague subject. Volpeculus sagacis (talk) 21:34, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Folks thanks for contributing to the debate around the page I created recently. I look forward to a resolution on this and will respect whatever the community decides. I believe the piece should stay because I believe it meets none of the criteria for deletion clearly. Taking the objections above:
 * Original Research - this is just a list, not a synthesis of ideas as might be expected in an article, and there are many comparable examples of incomplete lists on Wikipedia (eg List of Planetariums). These are original lists because they are added to by many authors. I respect the body of editors here who dislike lists in general but note that they don't currently violate Wikipedia policy.
 * Who defines 'unfortunately named'? - I find it hard that someone who puts themselves forward as an editor here should be unable to see that Brand names such as 'fart' and 'jussipussi' are unfortunate! Wikipedia policy does not require a source citation for statements which are transparently widely-held truths.
 * Trivia - there are plenty of precedents of articles here which are noteworthy to some readers and not to others. Much of my work is with marketing services businesses for which international branding is the core of their work. This stuff does matter - it is very hard to choose a brand name that works across all cultures.
 * Indiscriminite (sic) - the list is presently incomplete. I apologise for not putting a stub notice on it. I have invited others to make it more complete. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Infilms (talk • contribs) 07:06, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete but gently and with a sense of humor. Infilms, you can probably see where this is a little too subjective to be encyclopedic.  Fun, though.  Don't be discouraged....  --Lockley (talk) 05:55, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete (with pain in my heart) - It's the first list on WP I actually enjoyed. But it fails the guidelines....   SIS   01:12, 30 September 2008 (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.