Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Double Prices

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 all. Redirects may be created at editoral discretion. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 21:28, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Double Prices

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Completely unsourced, fails notability guidelines. Subject matter is already covered in List of The Price Is Right pricing games article and nomination follows similar discussions in related AFDs. Sottolacqua (talk) 13:36, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages because enough precedent has been set with the other AFDs for related pricing game articles that none of these are notable enough on their own to warrant individual articles. All pertinent information, sans most of the trivia, is already covered in List of The Price Is Right pricing games.

Sottolacqua (talk) 13:41, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all None of these games have any resonance in the wider popular culture. Joal Beal (talk) 14:38, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. – Sottolacqua (talk) 11:31, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 00:51, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect all to List of The Price Is Right pricing games - I've opposed the mass listing of these games before but after a slew of individual cases it now seems to be community consensus that there are simply no notable pricing games from The Price Is Right. Therefore delete article as failing WP:N due to community consensus as to notability, and leave a redirect. - DustFormsWords (talk) 05:59, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect everything in the list per DustFormsWords' reasoning. Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:30, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all None of the games are notable, lacking significant coverage in any reliable, independent sources. I don't think most of these are good redirect names since most have the odd disambigs on them. Wouldn't oppose a delete then new redirect for those without the disambigs. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 18:11, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.