| Revision as of 09:34, 7 August 2007 editCarbon-16 (talk | contribs)3,510 editsmNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 12:34, 7 August 2007 edit undoEyeSerene (talk | contribs)20,213 edits →[]: deleteNext edit → | ||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
| *'''Strong delete''' as bloated furcruft with no claim to notability, a whopping total of one media blurb, and a hell of a lot of ]. I agree with 76 up there. "Notable within context" is not appropriate for an entire encyclopedia, just as my grandma's bakery might be notable within the context of my town but not to a general audience. "One article is enough for Misplaced Pages's standards" is not correct, multiple reliable independent sources are desperately needed. Note to closing admin: "votes" clearly being stacked by "fursecution"-paranoid furry POV-pushers. ], anyone..? <font color="blue">-]] <small>]] ]]</small></font> 09:34, 7 August 2007 (UTC) | *'''Strong delete''' as bloated furcruft with no claim to notability, a whopping total of one media blurb, and a hell of a lot of ]. I agree with 76 up there. "Notable within context" is not appropriate for an entire encyclopedia, just as my grandma's bakery might be notable within the context of my town but not to a general audience. "One article is enough for Misplaced Pages's standards" is not correct, multiple reliable independent sources are desperately needed. Note to closing admin: "votes" clearly being stacked by "fursecution"-paranoid furry POV-pushers. ], anyone..? <font color="blue">-]] <small>]] ]]</small></font> 09:34, 7 August 2007 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Delete''' without prejudice as the article fails to establish notability per multiple, independent, reliable sources. Per Wooty above, one newspaper article is not enough to meet ]. This is about a production that apparently hasn't been released yet - if it eventually gets wider coverage it can always be recreated. ]''<sup>]</sup>'' 12:34, 7 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 12:34, 7 August 2007
Furry Tales
Not notable, there is but one link to an actual newspaper covering the event, the only other refs are from furry-related news sources Zero sharp 05:24, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. One article is enough for Misplaced Pages's standards, and it's being featured on Misplaced Pages's front page, so apparently it's notable enough for that. This is obviously a non-neutral attempt to delete it because it's furry-related and not for notability. --Coyoty 05:47, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. WikiFur News is furry, but it's also independent from the creators of the musical, who were not furry. It seems reasonable that we'd be the ones most interested in reporting on it. The article was also syndicated onto Wikinews in modified form by one of their accredited reporters, who presumably decided it was worth noting - I only found out about it several days later. I have about five pages of notes taken during the show that were used in the creation of the news article if you wish me to back up the claims more thoroughly, though that might be more suited for Wikinews' side of things. GreenReaper 05:51, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. You can't build an encyclopaedia if you always take out things you don't like. From the sounds of it it seems the furry haters are after us again. They never seem to understand that they can't win do they? Robomilk 08:39, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Kill with fire. 202.67.83.97 05:53, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
- Weak Keep I saw the Wiki News articles on it and seems to cite various sources however I think most may be considered violation of WP:POV. Sawblade05 06:19, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
- Delete This article pretty obviously fails to meet the guidelines under WP:NOTABILITY. It hasn't received significant coverage in independent sources. And in any case, unless they're going on tour, it's a current event and belongs at best in wikinews. 76.88.98.88
- Keep As the user who help promote this article for "Did You Know?", I feel this article is notable within the context of the furry fandom. ISD 08:44, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
- Speedy keep. Note that no qualified editors other than the nominator believe deletion is appropriate. --FOo 08:59, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Keep. The article seems fairly well written and has two solid sources with plenty of information. It seems to me that this rfd is just a part of the vandalism going on with the article at the moment, rather than a serious request. Chaos386 09:01, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
- Obvious keep, this article is a DYK, very well-written and enough references. I doubt why up till now no admin closes it "speedy keep". @pple 09:12, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
- Strong delete as bloated furcruft with no claim to notability, a whopping total of one media blurb, and a hell of a lot of OR. I agree with 76 up there. "Notable within context" is not appropriate for an entire encyclopedia, just as my grandma's bakery might be notable within the context of my town but not to a general audience. "One article is enough for Misplaced Pages's standards" is not correct, multiple reliable independent sources are desperately needed. Note to closing admin: "votes" clearly being stacked by "fursecution"-paranoid furry POV-pushers. WP:COI, anyone..? -Wooty 09:34, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
- Delete without prejudice as the article fails to establish notability per multiple, independent, reliable sources. Per Wooty above, one newspaper article is not enough to meet WP:RS. This is about a production that apparently hasn't been released yet - if it eventually gets wider coverage it can always be recreated. EyeSerene 12:34, 7 August 2007 (UTC)