Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/You Will


 * 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   keep. according to the consensus.  DGG ( talk ) 02:26, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

You Will

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

No reliable sources found. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 16:40, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep subject is notable for being an iconic advertising campaign, a significant early work of David Fincher, and is culturally interesting for the accuracy of its predictions. Luvcraft (talk) 17:49, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * WP:ITSNOTABLE doesn't hold water. Prove it's notable... I dunno, maybe by FINDING SOURCES? Seems no one wants to do that anymore. I already tried and came up with bupkis. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 19:32, 15 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:13, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Hammer, I added a reference, but you removed the reference with the comment "ugly". That is not a constructive edit, and undermines your AFD nomination. Luvcraft (talk) 18:01, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge: I don't know David Fincher, but I'll buy the argument. Still, it feels like the contents of the article belong inside another article and not in a standalone article. -- BenTels (talk) 11:34, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep: This is definitely a notable ad campaign. I found a reference in a major news source with less than a minute of Googling. I've added that citation and cleaned up the references a bit. Chris Quackenbush (talk) 23:02, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep this article, it may need improvment but is notable. Tduk (talk) 05:31, 23 September 2010 (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.