Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Full flavor (cigarette type)

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 merge to Cigarette. MBisanz ^talk 01:21, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Full flavor (cigarette type)[edit]

Unreferenced. Little more than a definition of a term. Furthermore, I have never heard of cigarettes being officially described as "full flavour" in the UK or elsewhere. It sounds a somewhat euphemistic. If this is a notable and established term, with a well defined meaning, and this can be proved, then that may be fair enough but if it is just a promotional neologism or an informal description then it is not encyclopaedic DanielRigal (talk) 01:22, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Promotional neologism, no sources. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 01:33, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Okay I am from the United States and many American cigarette brands such as Doral or Basic are labeled "Full Flavor". Now some brands like Marlboro and Camel are labeled "Reds" and "Filters" respectively. Heegoop, 21 December 2008 (UTC).
Delete. Not a neologism - I've heard it used in advertising (I'm from the US) - but it's still a promotional phrase that has no inherent meaning and doesn't need its own article. Graymornings_(talk) 01:50, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is an orphan article with no references, very unlikely to expand into anything significant - just a meaningless marketing term like "farm-fresh tomatoes" or "ranch quality beef". The term is also used in Canada. Maybe, just maybe, it would qualify for Wictionary. Aymatth2 (talk) 02:07, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete--Doesn't even rise to the level of a definition. Drmies (talk) 04:14, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Tobacco advertising, since "full flavored" is just one of the many gimmicks that cigarette makers used to hype their product, kind of like those "finest ingredients" that all processed foods seem to be made from. If it turns out a keep (not looking that way) take some time to do some sourcing [1] instead of original research. Full flavored cigarettes don't always come in red packages, but that's Kool. Mandsford (talk) 19:59, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per above or to Cigarette. In the US, that seemed to be an industry standard for classifying the tar content of cigarettes, which recently fell out of favor with the Federal Trade Commission. Notable because there's been a lot of litigation on "low tar" cigarettes, which recently went to the Supreme Court. Plenty of references show up that explain the difference between "full flavor", "light", and "low tar"; this is a good one: FTC: Tar testing invalid: Winston-Salem Journal, NC - Nov 26, 2008[2]. More sources:[3] My opinion is, if this wording is good enough for the industry, the Associated Press, and the Supreme Court, it's good enough for Wikipedia. Article should be expanded and merged into an article on cigarettes. Squidfryerchef (talk) 21:01, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. I like the idea of merging. Heegoop, 22 December 2008 (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.