Talk:Will It Blend?/Archives/2012

It stays

Until you get rid of the mounds of notoriety-based articles about celebrities who will never have significant impact upon society, "Will It Blend?" stays. Go delete Amy Winehouse's article, then you have my permission to take this down. -an experienced Wikipedian —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.243.180.163 (talk) 22:39, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm not an experienced Wikipedian, but it seems unnotable, and it seems to me that it might even meet the criteria for deletion.

It reads like a plug for the infomercials rather than an encyclopedaic article about the infomercials.

It doesn't look like the Will it Blend? series "has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works from sources that are reliable and independent of the subject itself and each other." It is "famous," rather than "worthy of being noticed."

From Wikipedia:Notability:

Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate directory of businesses, websites, persons, etc. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia.

fluffyx 16:31, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh noes the Inquisitors of deletion are upon us! Flee for your lives! --AiR 18:33, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

What about the Wiimote?

This article doesnt mention the youtube video in which a radio host attempts to blend a nintendo wiimote in a total blender, and it half-survives, by far the closest of any atttempted blending, and it at least deserves a mention. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.233.213.59 (talk) 01:56, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Letterman?

How come no mention is made of Letterman's "Will it float?". The entire ad campaign is obviously an homage to that, if not plagiarism of sorts. The tagline obviously plays upon people's knowledge of the latter. 216.99.241.2 (talk) 08:37, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Delete?!

Why delete? its got so many hits on youtube! I think that if the Numa Numa or the Star Wars Kid get an article on Wiki, this is definitely an internet phenomenon that deserves one too. Ilikefood 00:09, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

This article's a keeper. Andrew73 20:42, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia seems to require that a topic be the subject of multiple published works BEFORE it is included in Wikipedia. The only "references" for this article are promotional sites for Blendtec. (I'm sure that Blendtec's search engine rank isn't hurt by the links from Wikipedia.) The articles on "Numa Numa" and "Star Wars Kid" both have a hefty collection of good references; this has none. fluffyx 21:54, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, for starters, it was mentioned in David Pogue's blog on the New York Times, http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/01/05/will-it-blend/. Andrew73 22:21, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

My name is Nate, and I work for the Blendtec Marketing department - if you want a list of top notoriety that we have received since the beginning of this campaign I cam provide it on Monday. As a company we really want to remain neutral on all fronts when it comes to the promoting and of our company third-party, and allow the community to make their own decisions, and as you can see we have several fans that back us up. since the beginning of November (about 8 weeks to date) we have had spots on the Today Show and VH1, several local and regional news stations, many national radio programs, and as mentioned above on the internet nytimes.com and forbes.com. In the short 8 weeks we have run this campaign our company's channel has landed within the top 25 most watched videos on YouTube and the top 25 most favorites and we are still climbing in both categories. I will provide a complete documented list to this talk page on Monday, and let the community decide whether or not we are wiki-worthy.

One more note before I close this for tonight - this article is not for Blendtec, and therefore doesn't pertain to us or our company's notoriety, IMO it is simply here to provide interesting information about the "Will It Blend" internet phenomoenon.

--24.2.94.164 03:49, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

As promised - here is an abbreviated list of the notability of the Will It Blend marketing campaing. I would like to note on a personal level is that this campaign has changed the face of viral marketing and has definitely become a piece of internet history. It may sound like I'm overexaggerating the importance of this - and I may be, but I am absolutely proud to have been a part of this endeavor. This list contains only the more national coverage we have received, and in a few weeks I'll be able to add a few more that I can't disclose now. Enjoy. If you find this adequate, please remove the mark for deletion. If not, please state why so I can get whatever information you like.

TELEVISION

- Featured on the Today Show - NBC 11/22/06

- Featured on VH1's Web Junk 20 - 11/17/06

MAGAZINE

- Featured in Star magazine - 12/18/06

ONLINE NEWS

- Featured on front page of nytimes.com - 01/05/07 - http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/01/05/will-it-blend

- Featured on forbes.com - 11/03/06 - http://images.forbes.com/technology/2006/11/03/gaming-education-online-tech-personal-cx_de_1103download.html

PODCASTS

- Rocky Mountain Voices - 11/16/06 - http://www.rockymountainvoices.com/blog/2006/11/16/will-it-blend-50-gets-six-6-million-hits-in-five-5-days/

- CopperCast - 01/03/07 - http://www.copperrain.com/coppercast/?p=43

ONLINE SOURCES

thedailyreel.com - http://www.thedailyreel.com/news-opinion/news/will-it-blend-blendtecs-viral-marketing-sensation

Advertising Age - http://adage.com/outofsite/post?article_id=113185

Seth Godin blog - http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2006/11/will_it_blend.html

Again - these are only a few of the most notable exposure this campaign has received, not to mention the rankings in YouTube I referred to above, as well as the countless blogs and local news stories. 70.96.111.99 18:08, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Stop marking for deletion

Without evidenced cause...There has been plenty of evidence sourced that verifies this as a notable internet phenomenon. Even on Digg "Will It Blend" has become a cliche phrase. No matter what the cause, "Will It Blend" has become a proven case studied and respected viral marketing campaign. Any further attempts to mark this article for deletion will be promptly removed unless a viable argument is made other that "It's not notable".

According to the definition for Wikipedia:Notability:

One notability criterion shared by nearly all of the subject-specific notability guidelines, as well as Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, is the criterion that a topic is notable if it has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, reliable published works, whose sources are independent of the subject itself.

What constitutes "published works" is broad and encompasses published works in all forms, including but not limited to newspapers, books and e-books, magazines, television and radio documentaries, reports by government agencies, scientific journals, etc.

-"Will it Blend" has been the subject of editorials in newspapers, magazines, and radio/online documentaries as referenced above.

The "independence" qualification excludes all self-publicity, advertising by the subject, self-published material, autobiographies, press releases, and other such works affiliated with the subject, its creators, or others with a vested interest or bias.

-At no time has Blendtec ever publicized on the "Will it Blend" wikipedia article. The only direct and official edits by Blendtec have been to correct the company's name and to dispute the deletion requests. Any information provided has purely been the work of third-party sources.

"Non-triviality" is an evaluation of the depth of content contained in the published work, exclusive of mere directory entry information, and of how directly it addresses the subject.

-"Will it Blend" is a case study of new viral marketing, and while the content of the series might be trivial, the impact of the marketing campaign is not.

The "multiple" qualification is not specific as to number, and can vary depending on the reliability of the sources and the other factors of notability. For example, several newspapers all publishing the same article from a news wire service is not a multiplicity of works, while several researchers or journalists all doing their own research on a single subject and writing their own separate articles do constitute "multiple" sources.

-A quick (by no means comprehensive or conclusive) proof as to the multiplicity of works can be seen by doing a google news search for "Will it Blend".

"Reliable", as explained in the reliability guidelines, requires the source to have a certain level of editorial integrity in order to allow for a verifiable evaluation of the topic's notability. One rationale for this criterion is the fact that sources independent of a subject have noted that subject in depth (by creating multiple, non-trivial, reliable published works about it) demonstrates that it is notable.

-David Pogue and Seth Godin are an example of just two respectable and reliable resources.

According to, and in adherance with these same standards, as a Blendtec company representative I will not make any contextual changes to the article. I or any of my collegues will be happy to provide any information to those wishing to expound. I have provided easily found proof on all five levels of wikipedia notoriety standards that this article fits. Please discuss any further objections here before marking for deletion again. 70.96.111.99 19:19, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

After further research about standards on wikipedia, I have come across the guideline that it is considered a conflict of interest for a representative of Blendtec or any of its competitors to participate in any discussion on deletion. I will discontinue my postings, and let the community finish this work. As a side note, any edits I have made were completely by my personal choice and do not reflect the direct opinions of Blendtec. 70.96.111.99 19:31, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Surely if there are 50% of people asking for "Keep", and 50 for "Delete", why bother deleting it? Wikipedia is about information, and if 50% of people expect there to be a Will it Blend article (I sure did) then we should give them one! To have more information is better than having less when people are likely to recreate the article anyway. Gigitrix 20:44, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

It would be crazy if there was not a 'Will it Blend' wiki because some people haven't realised what an online sensation it is. Earfetish1 19:49, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Future Blendings

Okay, wikiers, what would you like "Will it blend" to put inside the blender? I would like to see some baseballs when Spring Training comes around. Remember, items MUST be able to fit inside the blender.--BigMac1212 04:26, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Wint-O-Green Life Savers--209.247.5.75 21:25, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

a cat geoff 22:06, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Baseballs have been blended. I would like to see a Psp, a GBA, a GBA xp and a GBC since they are now rubbish, especialy the PSP. Mariokart68 18:15, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Go to [1] if you want to suggest something, don't use this talk page. Please keep this page about the article itself. --Rory096 23:47, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Misleading?

There's been some amount of fan response about the reliability of claims made in the "Will It Blend" spots. I think the most coherent of these counterclaims is about the magnets episode. Here's the counter-claim to it. Perhaps further research is warranted on other claims. In some cases, the information in the spot is accurate, but doesn't present the full picture. The cubic zirconia spot mentions their hardness, but fails to mention cubic zirconia's brittleness, for instance (unfortunately the wikipedia article fails to state how brittle cubic zirconia is, so it's unclear to me how relevant that property might be).

BlendTec

I want to point out that there isn't even an article on Blendtec. --Voidvector 04:16, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

And maybe Thomas Dickson deserves an article, too; As far as I know, he lives in Orem, Utah, I dunno... Blake Gripling 11:44, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I think blendtec absolutely deserves an article, or at least a stub. It doesn't make sense that the article for a company redirects to its ad-campaign.

Virtuall Anything?

I think somewhere in the article it should be mentioned that Blendtec fudges it's videos to intentionally mislead viewers. Like failing to mention the brittleness of cubic zirconia, claiming to have turned two wiimotes to dust while another video shows the blender jamming at first and then barely chopping ONE up, and how he used cheap ceramic magnets but falsely claimed they were neodynium, some of the hardest magnets there are... And his embarrasment at the Internet Retailer 2007 Conference and Exhibition when the blender jammed while Tom Dickson tried to blend a rake.

And how is "cochicken" popular? Just because Blendtec did it in some of THEIR videos doesn't make it popular in the real world.. 69.220.2.188 (talk) 03:41, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

differentiate fiction from reality?

lots of the reasons and backgroudn stories mentioned regarding the blending of stuff on different episodes seems a bit too surreal or comical to be truth and yet in the article they're written in a way that gave me the impression they were suposed to be reporting the thruth and not the fictional reality of the show...could someone please clarify that? (in case it is the truth, clarify to me in the talk page, in case it is fiction clarify the article :) --TiagoTiago (talk) 09:23, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

"A demonstration video featuring the anticipated crowbar was interrupted by a cell phone, to which Dickson responds by stuffing the entire crew's cell phones into the blender and blending them instead. "

This seems to be an obvious fake to me. When I watched the video, the cell phone sound came from too close to the camera, and was timed too inconveniently. Why is it being represented as if it was in fact the original intention to blend the crowbar?

The video --149.4.211.210 (talk) 21:37, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Also notable about the crowbar case is that the first reference, to an Esquire article, quotes him as saying, "And we can’t blend a crowbar." [2] --149.4.211.210 (talk) 21:45, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Chuck Norris

Should the time he blended action figures including Chuck Norris, but Chuck came out perfectly be mentioned? The Chuck Norris Facts and Will It Blend? are both major internet memes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.68.195.149 (talk) 00:57, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Germany

Can someone please substantiate that Germany was blended in number 84? If not, I will take it down in one week because of the improbability of blending a country. --TruthfulCynic 03:16, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

The episode was titled Germany, but Dickson actually blended a German-English dictionary on CD. I have clarified. SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:06, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Spoof

There is a spoof video of will it blend on youtube by the two Characters Ahmed and Salim [3] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.204.230 (talk) 07:39, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Unless you can prove it's notable by third-party sources, it's unsuitable for inclusion. SchuminWeb (Talk) 18:39, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

The video is hell funny! It sure belongs to the article!

Technical Reality

Nice, nice, nice. All these stories. But where is the in-depth technical description, where are links to consumer tests of that machine, where are hints to the real life expectance of the article? The central point of this internet phenomenon is a machine which can be bought by consumers. We would not only want to read funny stories about what happened to a certain car, but a real test and real life description and usefulness of that car. Someone please get real and add such. From a reader in whose country the article is not sold. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.158.206.159 (talk) 19:48, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for Deletion

This is ridiculous. Nothing in this article is encyclopedic and it should be deleted already. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.49.252.52 (talk) 04:39, 6 January 2012 (UTC)