Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gene doll

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 Keep. Hut 8.5 11:22, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gene doll

Gene doll (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Unable to find any WP:Reliable Sources for this product. Plenty of promotional/shop sites list it and a couple of blogs say "this doll is my favorite", but nothing to establish WP:Notability. Toddst1 (talk) 01:56, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:V. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 02:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• I think that if the New York Times was willing to run a reasonably lengthy article about this doll (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E07EFDA113FF931A15751C0A96E958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all), it qualifies as notable.Wombat1138 (talk) 03:06, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, these are an odd little niche, something like American Girl for adults. Sources exist (though they do not abound) in Google Books and Google News Archive. --Dhartung | Talk 05:48, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per article in NY times to establish notability and verifiability. Keeper | 76 22:59, 18 December 2007 (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.