Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Clapper

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. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 18:09, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Clapper[edit]

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

This is a vanity page and/or advertisement, it contains no references or sources at all. Tom Barrister 06:00, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2013 December 24. —cyberbot I ^Notify_Online 02:59, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:09, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:09, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:09, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Low level commercial spam. Xxanthippe (talk) 03:52, 24 December 2013 (UTC).[reply]
Keep. One of the iconic goofy products (and ad campaigns) of the 1980s. [1][2][3] And something of a product design landmark--one of the first products to use a "gestural interface" and an auditory sensor [4][5]-- and still invoked frequently as an precursor for more sophisticated designs or as an object of nostalgia [6][7] [8].--Arxiloxos (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep on! Afd off! The clapper. It's in the same goofy league as the Chia Pet and X-Ray Specs. In addition to Arxiloxos's references, there's Gizmodo, and the Lemelson Center of the National Museum of American History has a collection of documentation about the thing.[9] Lots more where that came from, I'm sure. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:00, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Meets WP:GNG per [10], [11] (open page, then select p. 5), [12]. Northamerica1000^(talk) 12:14, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This device was iconic for a period of time, in the US at least. Reliable sources here and here discuss the product in depth. Gobōnobō ⁺ ^c 19:16, 24 December 2013 (UTC)\\[reply]
Note If it's going to be kept, then it needs sources/references, and the few it has need to be inline. I cleared most of the advertising tone from it. Also, for information purposes, sound-activated devices have existed since the 1960s; the Clapper was not the first to use this. Tom Barrister 20:29, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Delete per Xxanthippe. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 08:23, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Just read through the popular culture list. This item is notable enough in pop culture alone to merit an article. Crumpled Fire (talk) 23:25, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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) 01:55, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - there looks to be sufficient coverage in the above links to satisfy WP:GNG. Gong show 02:46, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - An iconic product which meets WP:GNG. VMS Mosaic (talk)
Keep. Subject is notable and interesting from the perspective of technological history. As somebody who was alive in 1973, I know that turning lights off by clapping your hands was seen as the height of tech sophistication. --gilgongo (talk) 20:41, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article has been significantly improved since nomination. Justifications for deletion given above are no longer valid (if they ever were). ~KvnG 21:01, 3 January 2014 (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.