Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of product placements
Listcruft and original research. Only a few instances in this list have footnotes, and yet only one footnote exists at the bottom. It's hard to say what is an actual product placement and what is an incidental or accidental placement in a film, show, or book without sources, and very few sources indeed are referenced or can be in such instances. Additionally, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. -- H·G (words/works) 19:07, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. List is too subjective, difficult to cite and verify, and too open to interpretation and debate. Scorpiondollprincess 19:15, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. It strikes me as tremendously difficult to figure out what's product placement (i.e., a paid advertisement) and what's just the use of an existing product in a movie; furthermore, I find it difficult to believe that it could ever be comprehensive enough to be anything but "a list of product placements"... It's pretty much impossible to maintain with an acceptable degree of verifiability or accuracy. -- Captain Disdain 19:24, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
- Delete - Trivial information, WP:NOT lists, difficiult to satisfy WP:V Torinir ( Ding my phone My support calls E-Support Options ) 19:34, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
- Delete - completely unwieldly and difficult to verify sources. And all for what purpose? -- Whpq 19:46, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
- Delete: I can imagine this list going on forever; it happens in the entertainment biz all the time, not just in the movies. Also against WP:V and WP:NOT. --Slgr@ndson (page - messages - contribs) 19:47, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
- Delete and take a long shower, oh man. Every entry in that list also constitutes product placement in Wikipedia. Phr (talk) 11:48, 20 July 2006 (UTC)