Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gesundheit radio


 * 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. The Bushranger One ping only 01:56, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Gesundheit radio

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

IP editor added the following statement to the article: This is a hoax/humor article. and tagged the article for AfD. I'm not so certain that the article is in fact a hoax in light of the reference, but the IP's nomination appears to be in good faith, so I am completing the nomination process on their behalf. Monty 845  02:51, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions.  Gongshow  Talk 03:03, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Reading the Gizmodo article, it looks like the backstory of the radio may be a hoax, but that does not mean that the article is a hoax. WP:HOAX does not apply to hoaxes that are notable, like the BBC's spaghetti tree hoax.--SGCM (talk)  05:24, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * the only factual part of the article is there there's a recently created piece of art on show. The remaining 95% of the article is fiction. (as per the gizmo do article) - 84.72.43.82 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.72.43.82 (talk) 06:47, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete It's apparently a piece of art. Nice enough, but I don't necessarily see notability.  As a hoax, I still don't necessarily see notability, and it should be noted in the article as a hoax.  --Nouniquenames (talk) 07:05, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 09:02, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Leaning to delete but . . . . The article as currently written is an in-universe hoax, and that is not something beneficial to the encyclopedia.  Viewed as an art project, or as a notable hoax, I don't see enough sources to make the Gesundheit Radio, by itself, worthy of an article.  However, it's possible that this could be refocused, expanded, and saved as an article about the actual designers, Chambers Judd, and their fictional "Attenborough Design Group" project that includes not only this sneezy radio but also the quadruped "Floppy Legs" floppy drive and the very contact-averse "Antitouch Lamp"; this work has been the subject of a bit of legitimate coverage, if more like this could be found, maybe notability could be established. --Arxiloxos (talk) 17:08, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * merging into the article of the Royal college of art could be good, this is here Royal_College_of_Art, this page could redirect if possible. Perhaps a subsection for the "work in progress exhibition" (where this piece is exhibited). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.72.43.82 (talk) 21:01, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 02:45, 1 August 2012 (UTC)




 * Keep - there are plenty of reliable sources for this intelligent artwork and its associated artistic whimsy, which is (of course) a critique of our throwaway technological society. I've rewritten the in-fiction section to make it clear what's real and what's not; and added several refs. It really was on show at MOMA and the RCA. The refs are nice and solid, including WIRED, SPIEGEL Kultur, PSFK. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:06, 1 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep &mdash; per Chiswick Chap mostly; it meets the GNG from the coverage in the article. I oppose any kind of merge to the RCA; this one work is too minor in comparison to be discussed in that article.  It's not too minor to have an article of its own.&mdash; alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:09, 1 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletions. – &mdash; alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:10, 1 August 2012 (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.