Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bonkers (pricing game)

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. deletion because we cant merge unsourced content and assertions of notability cannot outweigh piolicy based deletion arguments Spartaz ^Humbug! 16:56, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bonkers (pricing game)[edit]

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

Unsourced entirely, only source is the Golden Road fansite. No way could any of this indiscriminate trivia ever be sourced. Survived a bundle AFD in 2007 with no consensus. Tagged for lack of sources since 11/07 with no improvement. (There are more of these, but I don't want to crapflood AFD.) Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 20:29, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd merge more than delete, as they don't need to be separated. Oppose deletion, Support merging. You are opening a can of possible drama.Mitch32^{(A fortune in fabulous articles can be yours!)} 20:35, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with The_Price_Is_Right_(U.S._game_show), it is not notable enough for its own article UltraMagnus^speak 11:30, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The detail of this, already in Golden Road fansite, is more appropriate for the Price Is Right Wiki. It isn't Wikipedia's function to duplicate a fan site. Bonkers seems to be a variation of the higher/lower game and, to my knowledge, is not notable by itself. Mandsford (talk) 17:52, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The Price Is Right article is large enough. The game has been around for a while and undoubtedly has sources. the problem with tracking down sources is that the name of the game is somewhat generic and google searches churn out mostly false positives. --Pink Bull (talk) 16:57, 10 November 2009 (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.