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 merge. Johnleemk | Talk 15:19, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Under 700 Googles for a joke? A joke with farts in it? Not convinced! Just zis Guy you know? 19:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as not notable. -- Ned Scott 20:09, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as nonsense --TBC^{??? ??? ???} 20:10, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep It's an actual device, not a joke. Well it is a joke that the device actual detects farts, but it's not a joke that the device exists. Booking563 20:24, 22 March 2006 (UTC) Redirect to flatulence humor which I just created. Booking563 21:27, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment, please note that the above user created the Fart alarm article --TBC^{??? ??? ???} 20:34, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• So what? Is he wrong? Are you saying that he's lying or something? What exactly are you trying to say? Do you know that this article is nonsense? Have you looked into it? Are you an expert on joke toys? What were you basing your comment on? Why is his answer devalued because he wrote the article? Wouldn't that imply he knows more about it than you do?Grace Note 09:36, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's just that WP:AFD says "If you are the primary author or otherwise have a vested interest in the article, say so openly"... TBC is more than welcome to point that out. --Kinu ^t/_c 19:40, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Quit discriminating. Just because I'm the originater of the article doesn't mean I'm wrong. Booking563 20:39, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment It is true that this thing actually exsists, but currently the article is lacking notability. It needs sources. --TheKoG (talk|contribs) 20:31, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Guys! Calm down! Flatulence humor is a good solution. It stands some chance of being encyclopaedic, and is of greater than substub length. Just zis Guy you know? 22:09, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Non-notable. Bucketsofg 20:57, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• keep it is a real toy that exists Yuckfoo 20:58, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Real, maybe, but I cannot recall any other joke toy scoring quite that few ghits. When you consider the size of the schoolboy population, and the millions of ghits for fart, it's close to invisible. Just zis Guy you know? 21:20, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

try other names then this type of toy is also called "fart detector" and "fart buster" and is common novelty item [1] Yuckfoo 21:31, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• comment the name "fart detector" has 20,000 ghits but that is not so important [2] Yuckfoo 21:34, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, it is not so important, because this is an article on fart alarm. If it has other names by which it is better known, perhaps they already have articles. Just zis Guy you know? 22:17, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

*delete as second grade level humor that is highly non-notable. JoshuaZ 22:19, 22 March 2006 (UTC) Redirect and merge to flatulence humor per Booking. The general phenomenon of humor based on around flatulence is midly encyclopedic. JoshuaZ 21:41, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, non-notable product. --Kinu ^t/_c 06:28, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Maybe redirect to fart detector. When you boys say this is "non-notable humour", are you saying that humorous things are not notable by definition or that so far as humorous things go, this thing is not notable? How are you judging that exactly? When would a humorous thing be notable? Who would you require to note it? How do we know whether it is more or less notable than a particular Pokemon or an episode of the Simpsons? Yuckfoo has shown that www.prankplace.com has noted the "fart detector". So if it was noted, how come it's not "notable"? Grace Note 09:36, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • A Pokemon or episode of The Simpsons? Apples and oranges. If anything, comparison should be made to something similar, i.e., the whoopee cushion. But not everything you can buy at Spencer's Gifts is notable. Besides, I would hardly call prankplace.com a source which establishes notability; it's an online store that simply sells it. --Kinu ^t/_c 19:45, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Apples and oranges. If anything, comparison should be made to something similar. Man, are you not getting it! Look, my point is that what's notable depends who's doing the noting and what the thing being noted is. It's not an objective standard. So you can't just say "it's not notable". Because we're saying Pokemons are notable, Simpsons episodes are notable, but fart gags are not notable? How? What's your standard? And friend, if someone thinks a thing is saleable, they think it's notable. Grace Note 06:17, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge into an article about all possible fart gags, e.g., Flatulence humor, togther with Fart extinguisher and what can be more (eg a summary for whoopee cushion). No sense to keep thiese miniarticles with low chance of expansion. 23:38, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
• delete and do not merge as non-notable humor. If it's not notable enough for an article, it's not notable enough for any article.--Mmx1 21:46, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge all joke novelty items to one or at most a small handful of pages. No need to keep creating one new page every time a manufacturer ships another variant of the same or similar joke, address the whole category of items as one big article. --carlb 02:07, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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.