Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black magic (caffeine)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. The Bushranger One ping only 13:50, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Black magic (caffeine)[edit]

Black magic (caffeine) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The only reference for this article does not include any reference whatsoever to "black magic", it is only a basic caffeine data sheet. Google results for "black magic caffeine" are instruction teks for how to "free base" caffeine from coffee. Not notable. flaming () 05:44, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I suspect the real source for the article is this video. It's a silly argument for drug legalization, an illustration of how a recreational drug can be made from material you can find around the house. Epaminondas of Thebes (talk) 15:33, 4 October 2013 (UTC) SOCK[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:26, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - no evidence of notability PianoDan (talk) 18:32, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 02:49, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom; no sources specified that actually mention the subject. The name seems to have originated from an article/video [1], but it's not notable.--Larry (talk) 22:54, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - yeah, I saw this while re-writing a related article and was going to nominate it for deletion for all the reasons outlined by the nominator. I didn't get around to it but I'm glad Flaming did. Stalwart111 02:56, 13 October 2013 (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.