[WikiEN-l] Fleshlight

[Bryan Derksen]

Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote:
> On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 17:41:29 -0600, Bryan Derksen
> <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
>>> I think the answer to this question is to check the availability of
>>> recorded media celebrating skilled operators of the pipe organ versus
>>> the fleshlight.  Organists are notable, wankers are not.
> 
>> How many celebrated skilled operators of [[Donald Knuth]] are there?
>> This is kind of a weird criteria for establishing "notability", I don't
>> think it's widely applicable.
> 
> I was addressing the specific question: if not fleshlight then why
> pipe organ.  Pipe organs have been made for centuries by many
> different companies and individuals; the comparison is simply invalid.

But "the comparison is simply invalid" was _my_ point. Why are you
taking the reasons for pipe organs being important enough to include in
an enclopedia and checking to see whether they also apply to a _sex
toy_, of all things? It can't possibly apply in a meaningful way.

> How many non-trivial independent sources are there for fleshlight?
> Mainstream publications?  Has it been reviewed in Loaded?  Or is it
> just advertising plus a load of "hur hur, look at that, that's so
> smutty, hur hur"?

I don't know. My point is that this was something for interested editors
to decide via the standard mechanisms (talk pages, AfD, etc), and that
Danny was flat-out wrong to unilaterally deleted it like he did.

Considering that the article was kept by AfD, which I consider to be
deletionism-leaning in general, it seems likely to me that there is more
to this article than just advertising.

>> Personally, I have no idea whether Fleshlight is notable or not without
>> doing further research I probably don't care to perform. But that's what
>> talk page debates, AfD, RfC and such are for. We have ways of reaching
>> community consensus on such things.
> 
> Sure.  Debate it.  But let's wait until we have all the facts before
> starting, rather than second-guessing Danny and crying that the sky is
> falling because one wank-o-matic got deleted.

Why couldn't Danny have waited for all the facts before he deleted it?
It's generally not a good idea to delete first and act questions later,
especially when you're in a privileged position where your seemingly
capricious acts can sometimes be enforced with the strength of the
highest "law" on Wikipedia.

As it turns out that this wasn't an Office action, second-guessing it is
entirely appropriate. Danny isn't magic.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 250 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20061011/3e0b4c27/attachment.pgp