Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Champagne powder

: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 merge to Types of snow. (non-admin closure) Michaelzeng7 (talk) 03:11, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

=[[Champagne powder]]=

:{{la|Champagne powder}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Champagne_powder Stats])

:({{Find sources|Champagne powder}})

Proposed merge for nearly 2 years, the name for a type of snow which happens to be trademarked, otherwise unimportant. ViridaeDON'T PANIC 03:19, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:56, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:57, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LlamaAl (talk) 00:07, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

  • Merge Couldn't find an actual dictionary hit on the term itself on an extensive Google search, but found this definition at [http://skiing.about.com/od/typesofsnow/a/snow-terms.htm About.com]. Also, found multiple .com hits (these are just a few) at: [http://www.theskichannel.com/news/featured/20120220/steamboat-crushes-snow-record-34-inches-of-champagne-powder/ 1], a legal controvery from a questionable .com source [http://montanasnowsports.com/?p=1513 2] (something tells me you can't TM the snow name, particularly since "Champagne" is already copyrighted and the "snow type" exists wherever it falls as described above at the About.com link). Everything is tourist/promo/.com oriented with the exception of the legal aspect that seems improbable to worry over, and the one semi-reliable definition at About.com. Considering the lack of item-specific, reliable non-.com sourcing, & the lack of a separate, universally accepted context for singular usage, it should probably reside with the other "snow types" without regard for an individual listing in article space. Barada wha? 20px 01:21, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Merge The article in Der Spiegel says only that it's a catch-phrase, and while the term should probably mentioned somewhere, it doesn't appear to merit it's own article. a13ean (talk) 18:35, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

: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.