Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Realdoll

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 of the debate was k33p. — FREAK OF NURxTURE (TALK) 08:02, Feb. 11, 2006

[edit] Realdoll

In a word, advertising. Delete TheRingess 09:23, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Weak keep. Page is kind of advertisy right now, but it's a pretty famous product. Not a huge loss if deleted, though. --Allen 18:16, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Not what I was expecting :), but certainly seems notable and verified, so keep. Turnstep 20:45, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Ardenn 00:14, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, real product, has been the subject of articles in Salon & (if memory serves) Wired, well-known in "popular culture" of Slashdot & Fark. Though I regret citing Fark as a reason to keep something . . . Crypticfirefly 00:49, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep -- fairly notable as sex toys go. Haikupoet 04:22, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Fairly well known product. The article is written from a pretty advertisement standpoint, so it needs cleanup and NPOV, but it's a legitimate subject for an article. --Wingsandsword 10:03, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. I've heard of this one via 4Chan and Something Awful, and it's apparently very well known. Agree that the article does need cleanup and NPOV.--み使い Mitsukai 16:30, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
  • keep. as above. -- Waveguy 06:19, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep and rewrite is a real and notable product, has been mentioned in legitimate sources. Bad ideas 07:54, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep and rewrite as above Zelmerszoetrop 03:16, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep -- I feel that the doll has become fairly well known and generally gets a lot of attention because of its price tag as well. Needs some rewriting but I think worth keeping. Lummie 01:14, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
  • keep. as above.
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.