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. MBisanz ^talk 03:03, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jubbly[edit]

Jubbly (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Contested prod. Article is about a made-up food. TN‑X-Man 15:55, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, but this is NOT a made-up food. Just because you have never heard of it does not mean it has been made up. If you are not from North East England, then you probably won't have heard of it, however please do not sit at your computer and imply that I am making things up. --Bravo Plantation (talk) 15:58, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Without citations this appears madeup. Rob Banzai (talk) 16:00, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment These do seem to actually exist: Jubbly Ice Lollies. Of course, that doesn't necessarily make them notable, but they don't seem to be made up. Dawn Bard (talk) 16:05, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That product does not appear to be the same thing in the article. Rob Banzai (talk) 16:08, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• (edit conflict) Comment - Your link is a good one, but the article seems (to me, at least) to be referring to something else. Possibly it's a case where a brand-name is used as a generic descriptor (such band-aids, scotch tape, etc.)? TN‑X-Man 16:09, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• (edit conflict with comment below)I think you're exactly right, Tnxman. If that is the case, the the article should be deleted, no? And an article about the brand name product can be created IF it can be proven notable? Dawn Bard (talk) 16:14, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I agree. The brand name is one thing, but this appears to be different. If the brand name can be shown to be notable, an article definitely could be created. TN‑X-Man 16:20, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• There you go, so it does exist. I would like an apology for it being implied that I have been sitting here making things up (which is the same as telling lies). I was a raised as a good Christian and I would never ever tell lies. So delete the article if it makes you feel better, but please do not suggest that I have made things up.

--Bravo Plantation (talk) 16:13, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Bravo that product is not what you describe in your article. You describe an ice lolly being manually mixed with a soft drink to create the "Jubbly." That link is to a manufactured product. Without further clarification and citations this still appears to be unsupported. Rob Banzai (talk) 16:16, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Bravo, do you have any reliable sources that show why this is notable? TN‑X-Man 16:20, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per comments above. Dawn Bard (talk) 16:24, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:N (and above), since all I can find is people using the phrase wubbly-jubbly again and again. Even that's not appropriate for inclusion, since it seems to be a neologism. miquonranger03 (talk) 16:50, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 19:47, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When will I find out if my article is going to be deleted or not? It's been hours now. Thanks. --Bravo Plantation (talk) 20:20, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• AFD nominations generally stay open for 5 days. I would like to offer a friendly suggestion - that you check out Wikipedia:Ownership of articles. The article isn't yours, per se. Dawn Bard (talk) 20:34, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I know the article isn't mine :) It was just a figure of speech as I created it! --Bravo Plantation (talk) 21:03, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete based on Bravo Plantation's admission that he just made it up. Edward321 (talk) 14:21, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Add it as a comment to the Slush article. That would make the former more substantial. --Shieldfire (talk) 04:05, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Message to Edward321[edit]

You posted on the talk page for 'Jubbly' that it should be deleted as I confessed to "making it up". Please remove this comment as I NEVER once said this. I consider the comment that you made to be unjustified, and quite illegal. Please remove your comment and issue me with an apology or I will take this further. --Bravo Plantation (talk) 16:59, 13 September 2008 (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.