Surely this is just another symptom of the fact that
the "majority view"
consensus of the community can sometimes be wrong? Nevermind the fact that
it is only a handful of editors (relative to the whole editing community)
who are party to any given issue. OK - perhaps you disagree in this
- but can you really not imagine a similar situation where one or two
are in the right, and most people involved are flat out wrong?
There's certainly many times that the majority is flat-out wrong. I'm not
convinced that this Fleshlight situation is one of them, though.
Especailly in tenacious situations like this, "when in doubt, don't
delete" should be the guiding principle.
I am firmly of the belief that there are fundemental flaws with
modus operandi. The whole "consensus approach" to things like AFD are
entirely capable of producing undesirable results. They'll continue to do
too. We will continue to have rubbish of all varieties kept, and
ill-written, obscure, disliked, inaccurate (not necessarily incorrect) and
unfortunate content deleted. And that's just the stuff that reaches AFD!
Funny, you and I have the same complaint, except that I think we're
deleting too much otherwise useful stuff.
Sorry for being harsh - but I'd really like to see some attempt to deal
these fundamental problems that Wikipedia has!
I don't think keeping a notable sexual product is a "fundamental problem."
There are a lot of bigger issues to tackle, including what constitutes a
reliable source, moving away from notability as a blanket criteria, and
dealing with more objective benchmarks. If you want to go after unnotable
sexual products, there's probably a lot out there of lesser importance.
If you can read this, I'm not at home.