Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Potato judge

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. BJ^Talk 05:38, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Potato judge

One time Conan O'Brien character, non-notable. Abductive (talk) 08:24, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 10:47, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Very weak keep as it is notable on the iinternet as "a metaphor for a ruthless, arbitrary, unjust, or draconian judiciary process." A few more citations would make this a regular keep. Gosox5555 (talk) 12:54, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No citations found. I hate people who say "Keep but source" yet fail to dig up any sources, or fail to realize that such info can't be sourced. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 15:32, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A Google search suggests that it will be difficult to find any independent, reliable sources about this topic. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:41, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Metropolitan90. Also, if this is a widely-used internet metaphor, shouldn't the ghits be showing us actual instances of that? ReverendWayne (talk) 22:23, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The article itselt admits it was a brief, one time character, which really means "not notable". "Googly eyes"? Niteshift36 (talk) 04:41, 14 July 2009 (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.