Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SKYY vodka

SKYY vodka was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was to keep. Cool Hand Luke  07:33, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

A photo of a bottle of vodka, minimal facts about it (all presumably appearing on the label), and a link to the manufacturer. Shall I now go through the five brands of beer in my fridge and write each up in a separate article? The beers are Belgian and distinctive, and I could even think of things to say about them. Sheesh. Er, sorry, I mean "SKYY" (Sky?) vodka is not notable. Hoary 08:47, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep: I will change it to a substub. It is better than nothing. We are trying to make all knowledge available free, aren't we? Brianjd
 * However, it sounds like this should be moved into another article and a redirect created. Brianjd 10:02, 2004 Nov 27 (UTC)


 * Keep: The picture is one I took of myself and is released into public domain. I agree with Brianjd about keeping knowledge.  The article, as it stands, is a stub for more detailed information about SKYY vodka.  Cburnett 08:51, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Keep, a rather notable high-end vodka. RickK 09:18, Nov 27, 2004 (UTC)


 * I'd never heard of the stuff, but I did a little websearch. It's American. It's a bit expensive (in more tony language, "high-end"). Some people say that it doesn't give you a hangover. (Surely the same is said about all vodka.) The boss had the great marketing wheeze of sticking it in a blue bottle. (I don't see how this would affect its taste.) I particularly enjoyed a review titled Tastes like ethanol -- but de gustibus non est disputandum. What I find about it on the web is pretty ho-hum, and anything beyond this would risk being outlawed as original research, no? Make it a paragraph within an article about American vodka, maybe -- but I'm still underwhelmed by the idea of an article devoted to it. (NB I didn't complain about the photo.) Hoary 09:43, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Hoary: you never heard of SKYY Vodka until you read my article. It sounds like the purpose of having an article about SKYY Vodka is, ironically, fulfulled. Cburnett 09:49, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * But Cburnett, you're thereby making your article sound rather like an advert for Skyy vodka. (Or what was the purpose?) Look, if W'pedia really benefits from an article for each brand -- OK, for each "high-end" brand of vodka, then how about an article for each "high-end" brand of, say, windscreen wiper? I'd guess that the designers are just as innovative, and almost certainly they're underappreciated. Hoary 09:58, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. I think any product which is widely available is worthy of an article (especially one with 22,500 Google hits). [VfD tag has been removed from the page - I'll replace it] David Johnson 11:22, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, just another brand of booze. --fvw* 12:13, 2004 Nov 27 (UTC)
 * Move to List of Whiskey brans or something similar. Wyllium 13:14, 2004 Nov 27 (UTC)
 * Keep: DCEdwards1966 13:24, Nov 27, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: Not notable, and this is not an advertising site. Could be moved to a page called Obscure North American beverages  Nice picture perhaps that could go to an article on glass, if the uploader wants to use it Giano 13:30, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * It's not an obscure brand by any means, but the article isn't much more than an ad right now. We have plenty of articles on various brands of alcoholic beverages, and I don't see any reason why SKYY shouldn't be one of them. I'll look into expanding it a bit so it says something other than what's on the label. -R. fiend 15:48, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Still Keep: The article as it stands is a substub. I don't know much more about it, but the contribution I can make is a photograph of the bottle.  If your problem is the lack of article content then you're welcome to expand it and so is every single other person in the world who reads it.  The substub is there and signify it as such.  It is not an advertisement.  If your complaint is about an article for a brand maybe you should submit for deletion for every product on wikipedia?  There's probably only what?  100,000 of them? 10,000 of them?  After all, the only people possibly interested in a product or anything about it are consumers.  This is just absurd.


 * And, yes Hoary, if you can write something on windscreen wipers then make a page on each brand. I know there's more to SKYY vodka than I know.  Putting up a vfd because you don't think there's anything to it is sad.  I don't know if there's anything to write about windscreen wipers but I wouldn't delete a page because of my ignorance.

Cburnett 19:23, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC) (forgot to do this when I posted it)


 * Keep. This subject is notable. Should and can be expanded at some point in the future. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 18:13, Nov 27, 2004 (UTC)


 * Extremely minimal substub. The picture is far more bytes than the words (and that's a bad sign).  The vodka has some notability to it for its con-job, if nothing else.  When it was introduced, it wasn't just a case of a blue bottle, but it was also an extremely aggressive outdoor advertising campaign with enormous amounts of near-nudity and sexual suggestiveness.  In NYC, it was on every other bus shelter.  This is as small an article as I'll ever vote Keep on, I think. Geogre 19:24, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Extreme keep. My attorney has advised me to resist the urge to wage personal attacks. &mdash;[[en:RaD Man|RaD Man (talk)]] 20:46, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Excuse me? Is there a hidden reference here? You're reason for keeping is....? Giano 13:51, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * You're excused. And I seriously hope you're kidding if you think this topic needs any further reason to keep beyond what has already been provided.  &mdash;[[en:RaD Man|RaD Man (talk)]] 07:22, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Keep. Certainly notable enough.  --Idont Havaname 21:35, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. However, merging this and SKYY Spirits LLC into one SKYY article wouldn't be a bad idea.  -Sean Curtin 00:25, Nov 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. and I'm seconding the above merge. - Lifefeed 17:28, Nov 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Not "obscure" or "North American", it is common in Australia as well. Merging with other products by the same company would be a good idea as well. -- Chuq 05:14, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Prevalent enough that I have to order one of my favorite drinks "with Grey Goose instead of Skyy," as Skyy is the standard.  In case it was just a local thing, I checked Google -- 22,400 hits for "skyy vodka" -- and the article is much more informative than most substubs.  SWAdair | Talk  07:20, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Keep. Notable brand; agree with Gtrmp. Hoary, go ahead and write those beer brand articles, too. [[User:Rhymeless|Rhymeless | (Methyl Remiss)]] 07:39, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * If, as Geogre says, there was "an extremely aggressive outdoor advertising campaign with enormous amounts of near-nudity and sexual suggestiveness" for this ethanol/water mix, then I suppose it would have a certain teen appeal. Certainly some of you seem to think it's extremely noteworthy; ergo, it is (for some people). Even so, I do prefer Giano's idea of sticking something about the booze within Obscure North American beverages and the container in an article on glass. Meanwhile, in his/her unsigned comments above, Cburnett seems to have misunderstood my point, which I perhaps phrased poorly. If I wanted to write articles about individual kinds of windscreen wipers, that would be because I had something to say about them, and I'd be sure at least to indicate this (and thus the noteworthiness) in the very first stub. And if by "the only people possibly interested in a product or anything about it are consumers", Cburnett means consumers of that product, this is very obviously untrue. Among kinds of booze, there was for a long time a great interest in absinthe when it wasn't even available. I don't consume Japanese mass-marketed "black beer" because despite its guinnessy appearance it tastes like lager with lashings of caramel, but I would be interested to know if my suspicions are correct and this is indeed how the stuff is made. (Surely caramel isn't that opaque. Do they chuck in dye as well?) As for the beer brand articles, no, I'm not going to write them. If I did ever feel like writing about individual brands of beer, I wouldn't do so -- I'd subsume descriptions of the individual beers within descriptions of the particular kinds of beer: lambic (which I happen not to like, but whose fermentation is an extraordinary process), bi&egrave;re blanche, etc. After all, different kinds of Belgian beer have different proportions of ingredients, fermentation techniques, etc.; and thus the differences among different brands are in the beers themselves (cf the situation for cheeses), and only trivially in the packaging, advertising campaigns, and other flimflam. Hoary 13:32, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * SKYY vodka is not obscure. Only you (who admit you never heard of it) and Giano think so with everyone else disagreeing.  What I can't figure out is why you're so passionate to delete this one article (although deleting seems to be your forte) when there are thousands of products and 2710 substubs Category:Substubs.  Why are you calling this one product, with 22,000+ google hits, not noteworthy when you had not a clue about it even before you vfd'd it?  I fail to see how you must know of something before it can no longer be called obscure.  I think Billboard Dad is more obscure, perhaps I should go delete it because it's "just another Olsen twin movie" and not note-worthy. Or perhaps I could improve it instead.  Oh wait, you already did that. Cburnett 19:23, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Dear oh dear. I'm not passionate to delete this article; I'm mystified by the need for it. The original substub gave no hint of how the booze might be noteworthy, and googling around suggested that it was merely a cannily marketed but conventional vodka (ethanol/water mix). As recently expanded, the (sub)stub still doesn't explain to me how it's noteworthy to the tune of a whole article. Indeed, thousands of other products that get their own articles also don't seem noteworthy, but since a lot of people here seem to think that W'pedia should encompass a US trade directory (and fancruft compendium, etc.), and since my time and effort are limited, I say nothing about most of them. Yes, Billboard Dad, the TV pseudomovie, seems to me to deserve no more than a token paragraph in the article about the Olsen moppets; I was tempted to merge the former in the latter, but was pretty sure that people would claim the TV show was "noteworthy" merely by virtue of having been broadcast on US TV, so I didn't bother. (If anybody suggests deleting Billboard Dad, I'll happily second the suggestion.) Hoary 02:32, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Keep and expand. Noteworthy stuff. - Lucky 6.9 00:28, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep because if Geogre said keep, then it must be hella notable. But seriously, he makes a good point: that the saturation ad campaign that Skyy launched makes it notable to the billions who have seen the various semi-nude twentysomethings staring out from kiosks in cities across North America.  Chicago was covered with Skyy ads all last summer too.  It is an appropriate Wikipedia topic.  Fishal 23:08, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep for reasons listed above. Skyy is (as far as I can tell) the single most prominent American vodka brand; I don't see how this is any different from the other pages about various alcoholic beverages. neckro 09:41, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.