Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aneros (2nd nomination)


 * 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.  Jerry  delusional ¤ kangaroo 23:54, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Aneros
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)


 * Not notable sex toy. No independent reliable source prove its notability. Tosqueira (talk) 00:04, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Anecdotally popular and among the more frequently stocked toys. Need some good sources to keep the article, though. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 00:09, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 11:53, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: Advertising and a novelty novelty.  Utgard Loki (talk) 13:39, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete no sources. We66er (talk) 00:59, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * keep as something present in essentially every advertisement for such things from multiple companies pervasive throughout the web. formal sources for such things are fairly rare, so for things that are clearly notable, we use common sense. DGG (talk) 23:45, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * There is no common sense. The only way to prove notability is by WP:IS WP:RS. See also: Articles for deletion/United World Chart. Tosqueira (talk) 06:55, 17 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Plenty of discussion in blogs and presence in sex-toy stores. Here's a link to a magazine article where it is discussed http://www.fabmagazine.com/features/313/come.html .  And that should be enough for basic notability. --Simon Speed (talk) 11:07, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Simple google search validates it's popularity and uniqueness. The Msnbc.com article is by Brian Alexander, a featured writer on the site.  Arena Magazine, Details, and wide variety of book references, serving as independent and reliable  sources, validate its notability.  cometmaker (talk) 21:31, 18 September 2008 (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.