Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trader Bob

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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:01, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Trader Bob[edit]

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

Sufficiently covered at List of The Price Is Right pricing games. Contains egregious original research such as "Trader Bob's structure allowed no room for error. This resulted in a low win-loss ratio and played a large role in its eventual retirement." and no sources whatsoever. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 00:04, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Is there any central place the propriety of these TPIR game articles are discussed? See, e.g., Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Check Game. I am inclined to think the content of the various games articles can be combined into list articles.--Milowent (talk) 00:11, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The list article is mentioned in the above nomination. Sottolacqua (talk) 00:15, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Not notable, unsourced and already covered in List of The Price Is Right pricing games. Sottolacqua (talk) 00:15, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as failing WP:N and for the reasons covered in the previous pricing game AfDs. Unlikely search term and no merge, so a redirect isn't necessary. - DustFormsWords (talk) 05:50, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect to List of The Price Is Right pricing games as it isn't notable enough, to have an own article. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 10:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:08, 15 April 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.