Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Laffy Taffy Recall

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 speedy delete (G10) by Jclemens. Non-admin closure. MuZemike 19:47, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Laffy Taffy Recall[edit]

If this is true (and there is no evidence it is) it belongs under the Nestle article. There is no reason this supposed recall should have an article of its own. Carbon Rodney 15:41, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete as an attack page, cannot find any evidence of truth in my websearches. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 15:45, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as hoax, no evidence of present recall. I have placed hoax tag on the page. KuyaBriBri^Talk 15:54, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Additional comment. I don't see why this couldn't be speedy deleted as G3 or G10. I have reported its author to WP:ANV as he/she has been sufficiently warned regarding vandalism. KuyaBriBri^Talk 16:31, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as there is no mention of such a recall in any internet search, and therefore it appears to be a hoax. Sketchmoose (talk) 15:55, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (and speedy) as per all the above. No evidence, seems to be a hoax. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 15:59, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a hoax. Nothing on Google (and there would be if this was an actual recall). Doc Strange^MailboxLogbook 16:36, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete based on lack of references and the author's record of vandalism. This contributor, SarahPalin1234, has made three contributions to Wikipedia: This article and two vandalisms to New Laws. •••Life of Riley (T–C) 16:50, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- P.S. The author contributed another article, Law Passed!, which was deleted twice as vandalism on February 9. See [1]. •••Life of Riley (T–C) 16:56, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete (G3) as blatant misinformation. This looks like an attempt to induce panic or hysteria. I definitely call bullshit. MuZemike 17:11, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete G3, so tagged. Probably also qualifies for G10 Umbralcorax (talk) 17:33, 11 February 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.