Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Royal rumble drinking game

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.

Royal rumble drinking game

Royal rumble drinking game (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Specific drinking games are not generally notable, and for one like this, no description of the rules is going to be authoritative. While I can find other references to this game using Google, they don't show the same rules. Bovlb (talk) 01:55, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related page because it is unencylopedic for the same reasons:

Family Guy Drinking Game (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Strong Delete Non-notable/Nonsense --
  3:16 01:57, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • The vote above was added before I added the related page. Bovlb (talk) 02:03, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the
  3:16 02:00, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete, kill them both. Non-notable and impossible to reference. Nikki311 02:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as unverifiable and non-notable. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 02:21, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Wikipedia is
  ^talk 02:30, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete both - per User: TravisTX LonelyBeacon (talk) 03:11, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete both of them. Alberon (talk) 12:50, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete, made up, original work, unverifiable, and extremely non-notable.16:56, 10 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by LessThanClippers (talk • contribs)
• Delete - What more can be said? There is no indication of importance of significance. This just narrowly avoids qualifying for speedy deletion. The Hybrid T/C 17:06, 14 December 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.