Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Weet-Bix cards

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 redirect‎ to Weet-Bix#Weet-Bix cards. El Beeblerino ^{if you're not into the whole brevity thing} 22:41, 28 December 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Weet-Bix cards (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Not one independent RS is in the article. Searching only turns up trivial mentions in RS without anything usable in an article. Traumnovelle (talk) 21:20, 14 December 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and New Zealand. Traumnovelle (talk) 21:20, 14 December 2024 (UTC) [reply ]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:34, 14 December 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

I‘m not sure what is meant by RS but I have carefully assembled the albums and card lists from my own set. What is the reason for wanting to delete this page? A lot of NZ collectors use this. Tewheke (talk) 08:08, 15 December 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

RS means reliable source (WP:RS). You may want to read through WP:OR and WP:NOT. Traumnovelle (talk) 08:40, 15 December 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

• Delete as WP:FANCRUFT. Nothing wrong with having a collection of trading cards available for all to see but unless there are significant secondary sources accompanying the content, Wikipedia is not the venue for that. Ajf773 (talk) 09:12, 15 December 2024 (UTC) [reply ]
• Delete as this is clearly not an appropriate subject for Wikipedia. This would be better hosted somewhere like a private blog. David Palmer//cloventt ^(talk) 01:07, 18 December 2024 (UTC) [reply ]
• Merge consider instead a merge or expansion with the main article Weet-Bix#Weet-Bix cards section once enough Reliable Sources has been filled in, since its a related to a historically notable product after all.Villkomoses (talk) 14:24, 18 December 2024 (UTC) [reply ]
• Dratify worthy subject but the article just isn't there now. Go back and work on it and see if you can get it to a point where it can justify its place here. Otherwise, sadly will have to go. MaskedSinger (talk) 17:04, 19 December 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:25, 21 December 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

• Redirect to Weet-Bix#Weet-Bix cards - Since the subject is already covered on the parent article, a Redirect would be the preferred WP:ATD here. As the small bit of information included in this article outside of the list of cards is already included at the target, including the sources, no Merge is necessary. Rorshacma (talk) 16:40, 22 December 2024 (UTC) [reply ]
• Redirect to Weet-Bix#Weet-Bix cards is a sensible AtD. Sources inadequate to pass GNG as except for the Howieson & Marsden source they are non-independent, database/catalogue and a blog. Rupples (talk) 18:22, 26 December 2024 (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.