Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liquid ass

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. Kurykh (talk) 06:37, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Liquid ass

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Poorly sourced - which is all you can find on this product, so it clearly doesn't pass WP:GNG. Was a redirect to Bubba the Love Sponge, but there is no mention of this term on that page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:12, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete/Merge Not notable by itself but could be merged back with other articles that use the same chemicals and or pages that talk about usages of products like it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ContentEditman (talk • contribs) 22:50, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It is well sourced; KQED-FM is a huge NPR station and KQED-TV is a huge PBS station. The fact that this article was once a redirect has no bearing on whether it should remain now. The fact that the product is used by the U.S. government for serious training establishes the product's significance. It could not be merged "back" because it is a new creation. It could not be merged "into" articles about products using the same chemicals because its formulation is secret. —Anomalocaris (talk) 00:54, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Stink bomb per WP:ATD-M. Ha ha, funny topic. It has received some coverage (e.g. [1], [2]) and coverage for events that have occurred from its use (e.g. [3], [4]), but the overall depth of coverage is a bit light for a standalone article, in my opinion. The merge target article has no mention of this, so a merge will improve it. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:27, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Well sourced article. Has more uses than just a stink bomb. Mghabmw (talk) 03:11, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no credible evidence that it's used as anything but a joke. None of the sources are reliable. The KQED reference is a podcast that specializes in human-interest stories; has nothing to do with KQED TV or radio.Glendoremus (talk) 05:32, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Amy Standen and Judy Campbell are serious journalists. KQED-FM has broadcast this segment, and The Leap is as much a part of KQED as any of the broadcast shows.—Anomalocaris (talk) 02:05, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I completely agree with Anomalocaris, the article is well sourced and significant in the way it used in the military. Pastorma (talk) 16:30, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:47, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:13, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:13, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 05:52, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- Clear case with RS specifically about the topic. (Article should also be named "Liquid ASS".)--Froglich (talk) 06:46, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, there are sufficient sources and more newspaper reports available to be used. The product's title may sound, ah, pungent, but it's a real product with serious applications. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:38, 29 March 2017 (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.