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. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-08 22:16Z

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

Contested prod. Wikipedia is not for things made up at Microsoft one day. Also, no sources are presented and "Brummel brew" gets no Google hits ([1]). KFP (talk | contribs) 15:20, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• delete important as m$ is, the coffee they drink is not... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sbandrews (talk • contribs) 16:16, 4 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]
• Delete as unsourced and unverifiable. A good example of employeecruft. Walton monarchist89 17:28, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. There is nothing to suggest this term is notable. Heimstern Läufer 23:44, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and I agree with sbandrews. A random trivial fact about working at Microsoft is not notable at all. Jules1975 12:05, 5 February 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.