Talk:I've got your nose

Proposed deletion
This is probably the most absurd thing I have ever read on Wikipedia. I've seen far more relevant material get deleted for its relative unimportance. There's just no way this should have its own article. 88.145.64.8 (talk) 20:41, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Why on Earth shouldn't we have an article about a children's game that has significant coverage in independent reliable sources? That's what our notability guidelines are all about. Phil Bridger (talk) 08:53, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Because it's (a) not notable enough as a game in its own right to have its own page - far better to have a summary section in whatever article exists to document stupid, childish, inane nonsense and (b) no-one actually gives this dumb shit an official name. It's like having an independent article about scratching one's bollocks. Please don't remove the proposal template again, or I will report you for vandalism. Kind regards, 88.145.64.8 (talk) 14:15, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
 * 88.145.64.8, you do not get to restore a PROD template once it has been removed. This is made very clear at WP:PROD. Please don't restore it again. Also please don't talk nonsense about reporting rule-abiding users for vandalism. I've re-removed the template again, since it should never have been restored. Bishonen &#124; talk 14:56, 5 May 2019 (UTC).

History of the game
There is no information at all about the history of the game. It might be as old as humankind or it may have originated as early as the 20th century, everything seems plausible. Does anybody know of any reference of the game dating back to the Middle Ages of the Romans or anyway old enough to be relevant?

Btw, this game is also common in Italy; not 100% sure, but I can say that my grandfather used to play this game with me in 1989 ca. when I was a kid (My family and I are 100% Italian and resided all the time in Italy). I noticed that in China people also get shocked when language teachers play this game with kids, but just the first times they see you play it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:B07:AF5:78B1:A49A:440F:27A9:9F81 (talk) 21:33, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I can't find anything about the history under this name in English, but it seems pretty likely that such content could be found in other languages and/or under other names in English. It would just need someone more interested in the topic than I to find such sources. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:47, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * After a thorough search on Google Books, there seems to be no reference about this game before the 20th century, but this is not enough to state that the game is a new game. It is a game for kids, so it's rarely referenced in books or in any other written document.--2001:B07:AF5:78B1:A49A:440F:27A9:9F81 (talk) 17:20, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Citation needed controversy
There was a lovely thread on Mastodon earlier in which it was pointed out that the citation needed tag for the statement "At no point is the child's nose actually removed from its face" was the best citation needed tag ever. Rather than leave it be as a little bit of Wikipedia humor, user User:QuickQuokka took it upon himself to delete it. I reverted that edit. I do not want Wikipedia to be a soulless place, where the subtlety of a joke is lost on a user, to the detriment of the community. Compare with the story of the penguin from a few years ago..--Brad Patrick (talk) 11:41, 14 June 2023 (UTC)


 * (Replying to this comment) I think that the fact that a child's nose does not get removed during the game is pretty obvious to anybody familiar with how easily noses come off, and that this is a children's game. -- Quick Quokka  [⁠talk • contribs] 11:52, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * pinging @Dingolover6969, who added the cn template. -- Quick Quokka  [⁠talk • contribs] 11:59, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * The tag should be removed. There are ways to have fun without inserting spurious tags. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:28, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Lovely that it's now cited. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:45, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * except the citation does not actually provide any support for the claim. 68.46.173.55 (talk) 18:52, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree with . Searching that scan for   only turns up "That little piggy was not going anywhere, silly song, but this has always disturbed me more than the other apparently removable body part of the 'got your nose' game. The fact that pigs would eat roast beef did not disturb me at all (until ..." (that's the entire provided context). I support putting citation needed back in place, ideally permanently, but certainly until a proper citation can be found. Adam KatzΔ☎  20:11, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, I think most of the citations here are like that, to be honest. Just citations for the sake of citations without actually supporting the claim.
 * This whole article doesn't really seem notable. -- Quick Quokka  [⁠talk • contribs] 08:21, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I have reverted back to 'citation needed' since the citation did not fit (it's a passing reference rather than a statement of fact; the word "apparently" is doing too much work). Another option would be to go back to the form without either citation or citation request. I think this article is notable, just like Peekaboo, as an important game for infants and their development. Adam KatzΔ☎  15:57, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
 * @Fuzheado's edit 1164014753 actually found a valid reference! It was phrased a little differently and added in a different place, but it refers to a table cell that calls this and similar games "illusions targeted at immature body perception" which is probably as good as we'll get. The joke is sadly dead, and I'm not interested in continuing this edit war. Adam KatzΔ☎  19:19, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Hey, sorry for my flippant edit, I just thought it was amusing. The revert is even funnier :) Libreleah (talk) 17:10, 15 June 2023 (UTC) ( this is in reference to https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=I%27ve_got_your_nose&diff=1160308120&oldid=1160307888 )


 * I must admit that was funny af, but please don't do this in the future, cus it disrupts editing. Cheers! --  Quick Quokka  [⁠talk • contribs] 19:32, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Understood :) Libreleah (talk) 19:56, 15 June 2023 (UTC)