Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MonaVie Active


 * 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   Deleted per WP:SNOW/WP:CSD; page then redirected to MonaVie  EyeSerene talk 10:44, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

MonaVie Active

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Article appears to be a promotional fork of MonaVie, essentially going over the same ground with less overall balance. While MonaVie certainly appears to be a notable product, there doesn't appear to be any information that shows this particular product is notable on its own, or requires a separate article. Since all of the major material here appears to be covered in the MonaVie article, this can probably be deleted (and potentially be replaced by a redirect to MonaVie). B figura (talk) 01:28, 20 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete as nominator, for the reasons above. -- B figura  (talk) 01:28, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, and indefinitely block User:Ott jeff. It's just a WP:CFORK by a user who has done nothing since his arrival at Wikipedia but promote MonaVie.  The article exists solely because the people who have MonaVie on their watchlists won't allow him to whitewash the article there.  -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 01:46, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete and Block - While the article may have contained strong references, it is promotional (although not entirely) per WP:CFORK. I agree with FisherQueen. may have been an employee of the company.Boeing7107isdelicious 01:51, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator and FisherQueen; nothing but self-promotion of a non-notable product. GiantSnowman 01:53, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as nominated. Shoot Block article creator. Crafty (talk) 01:54, 20 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment author has been blocked by PeterSymonds. -- B figura  (talk) 02:13, 20 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete The sources are about the company, not this product, except for the company's press releasese which are not usable. Removed press releases, removed ingredients list, removed promotional material for company. There's nothing in the article, because there was nothing to begin with that was appropriate for an encyclopedia article. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 02:27, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as it's unlikely anyone other than the creator will ever edit the article except to redirect it to MonaVie or dispute Jeff's claims (this is Jeff's last edit to the article). -- Soap Talk/Contributions 02:41, 20 November 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.