Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neo-Blox


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 00:59, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Neo-Blox

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

This is a trivial list of toys that does not assert notability or importance, and it also includes some original research on fan reaction. TTN (talk) 23:14, 15 August 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:07, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Jake   Wartenberg  03:06, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Question. I'm relatively inexperienced in matters of AfD, so one question that comes to mind while reading this article is this:  Could this be considered a form of advertising?  I mean, it's basically a list of toys produced by one company.  I don't see how this qualifies as an article; there's nothing that appears notable to me.  Un  sch  ool  00:29, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. While it may not be considered advertising, it is definite OR, with no references to prove them otherwise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Warrior4321 (talk • contribs)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete. No claim to notability in this article. I also agree that stating every single model is form of advertising Wiki ian 10:06, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletion discussions.  -- Cyber cobra  (talk) 06:00, 30 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. Non notable and probably original research. -- nips (talk) 11:05, 30 August 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.