Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Magic rocks


 * 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. The Bushranger One ping only 03:23, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Magic rocks

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable. Unreferenced. Just one example of many manufactures who sold crystal gardens which were in wide use before their alleged invention in 1940. This is simply an an advertisement with no notability. The process is much better described at Chemical garden which is just partially duplicated here.  Velella  Velella Talk 09:58, 14 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete, merely a commercial landgrab but as nom says already far better handled at Chemical garden. This could actually have been speedied A10 (duplicates existing article) but I guess we are where we are now. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:49, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep and clean, it's a product with significant real world distribution and a long history. Surely sources could be found. --  Zanimum (talk) 19:39, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
 * It's one of the "101 Greatest Baby Boomer Toys", according to a 2005 book. --  Zanimum (talk) 19:41, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, maybe, but that would apply far more to the generic Crystal Garden/Chemical Garden toys of which this is just one poorly-referenced brand: the long history is not this brand's at all. Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:05, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 06:04, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 06:08, 15 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. I don't see any evidence of notability independent of other chemical gardens.  If this article is not deleted, it should be merged into Chemical garden.  Peacock (talk) 17:27, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 23:11, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran  ( t  •  c ) 09:35, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete or merge I agree with Peacock.  Miniapolis  ( talk ) 23:58, 30 December 2012 (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.