Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monster Energy

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 keep. - Mailer Diablo 07:52, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monster Energy[edit]

Unencyclopedic, totally unsourced, reads like ad copy. This could be pulled from an advertising flyer in a grocery store. User:RandomHumanoid^(talk) 22:03, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep. Article may be poorly sourced, but is not unsourceable. A search of Google News reveals many third-party reliable sources reporting on Monster Energy, such as [1], [2], and [3] Monster Energy is a clearly a notable product, and the aritcle's problems warrant clean-up, but not deletion. -- Schaefer (talk) 22:45, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep Delicious source of caffeine. ~ Infrangible 02:42, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While I disagree with your decision, I certainly enjoy your commentary...--User:RandomHumanoid^(talk) 05:00, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep per above. --Yarnalgo _{talk to me} 05:52, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 09:08, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 09:09, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'd vote to keep this article, but I'm not awake enough at the moment. I'll let you know this afternoon after I've had an energy drink. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 16:33, 14 June 2007 (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.