Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Milk bottle top


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:40, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Milk bottle top

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete/merge to Milk bottle. This nomination follows a contested PROD. Subject has not received significant coverage. The bulk of the article's content is original research that presents data without sufficient context. Two sources added by the contesting editor would be useful additions to Milk bottle, but don't constitute sufficient information to warrant a standalone article on this topic. Ibadibam (talk) 19:02, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 19:45, 4 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Any middle-aged Brit such as myself knows that the foil milk bottle tops that were famously collected by The Guide Dogs for the Blind Association in the 1960s, including via regular appeals by Blue Peter, are notable. I'm not offering this as proof of notability, but as a demonstration of how sources are difficult to find online for things that were ultra-notable back in the dark ages before the Internet. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:56, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Definitely a good example of WP:Wikipedia is wrong and WP:BIAS. For what it's worth, Guide Dogs for the Blind Association does mention the program (without citation, as you predicted). Ibadibam (talk) 20:07, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete While somewhat interesting WP is not a guide to milk bottle top colors. The handful of facts about milk bottle tops outside of that should be added to milk bottle itself. Kitfoxxe (talk) 21:58, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Totally keep a billion articles for every transformer ever imagined to exist, and we can't keep this? The color sources will be found. --(AfadsBad (talk) 04:14, 8 October 2013 (UTC))
 * The fact that other questionable articles exist should not be taken as a rationale for keeping this bad article. Each article should be taken on its own merits.  As for the sources, when will they be found, and by whom?  The article has been around for at least 6 years and nobody has added any yet.GodaiNoBaka (talk) 02:39, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete (or Merge to milk bottle if anything is worth retaining) per WP:INDISCRIMINATE. I like the idea of the article, but I just can't see there being enough reliable sources to establish that the bottle top is notable independently of the bottle.-- K orr u ski Talk 09:53, 8 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - I'm not a middle-aged Brit, but I agree with Phil. However, the article we have make no mention of the collecting, and given the lack of sources, the collecting aspect is best developed at The Guide Dogs for the Blind Association.  As for merging, I see nothing of value to merge.  The article is a trivia list of top colours. -- Whpq (talk) 16:05, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
 * On reflection, I'm inclined to agree with you about merging, and have amended my !vote to that effect.-- K orr u ski Talk 12:51, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Merge -The list of top colors is invaluable as a reference but I agree that there isn't enough to warrant a separate page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.10.50 (talk) 16:18, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete -As stated in my original rationale for the Proposal For Deletion, the article as it currently stands is almost entirely original research. There are two references provided, one of which has no direct relevance to the topic and the other of which does not support the point that it purports to.  Requests for relevant references have been made and ignored. Incidentally, allegations have been made of inaccurate or incomplete information being a part of the article.  GodaiNoBaka (talk) 02:39, 10 October 2013 (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.