Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Promotional mug

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 userfication. Page being moved to User:Eldakin569/Promotional mug J04n(talk page) 11:30, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Promotional mug[edit]

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

Was speedily deleted as a fork of mug. Author has protested so I will allow an AfD discussion. Certainly I feel it is better handled within the mug article and I question whether it even need a redirect. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:00, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect since they're WP:CHEAP. Article as it stands is more or less a copy of Mug. Ansh666 01:06, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, Userfy per below. Ansh666 01:18, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. It's worth a line or two in Mug, nothing more. Clarityfiend (talk) 10:20, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (or redirect, that's fine with me) - if the topic is notable there could of course be an article about it, but the current article contains virtually nothing about promotional mugs as opposed to other mugs — and almost all the content is taken from Mug. --bonadea contributions talk 10:07, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Move to my sandbox I still believe that the article is notable as per WP:GNG and should be in its own namespace as a stand alone article. What it lacks as some editors have observed is the bits and pieces about the promotional and branding bit. We have to all agree that promotional mugs exist.The topic might not be in the New York times or JSTOR but these mugs exists and even the Wikimedia Foundation that runs this project uses them for promotion purposes. The article is not tailored to advertise anything but to cover on the various materials and in future upon expansion to shade light on the methods used to brand these mugs. I have been busy offline and I have not had enough time to write about the 7+ technologies used in creation of promotional mugs. When you look at the see also section in the article, you will be directed to other pages which I think are in the same scope as this one. If other authors feel that the article should be deleted then I would request it to be moved to my sandbox so that I can improve it there to prove its worth. Eldakin569 (talk) 05:55, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy as per Eldakin569. Given that you seem to be the primary editor on this article, moving it over to your sandbox seems reasonable. It's possible - even likely - that taking some more time to find sources and differentiate this from Mug would be worthwhile. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 15:26, 24 May 2013 (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.