Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Alsatian


 * 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   delete. SarahStierch (talk) 00:12, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

American Alsatian

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete Non-notable crossbreed of dog with no reliable secondary sources available.  T K K  bark !  23:27, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organisms-related deletion discussions.  T K K  bark  !  23:34, 18 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 00:55, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Strong Keep - Problems stated have all been fixed. Independent secondary sources now exist on the article. Mrmoustache14 (talk) 09:28, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Sbierwagen (talk) 04:23, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 00:21, 1 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete: I provide here an analysis of the sources (numbering after the footnotes per this revision, current revision as of this !vote):
 * 1–2, 6, 9, 11–14, 17–20, and 22 (which support most of the relevant information): are closely affiliated to the creators of the "American Alsatian™":
 * 1–2, 6, 11, 13–14, 17–18, 20 all derive ultimately from the National American Alsatian Club
 * 12, rightpet.com, seems commercial and cites as its source "Little Miss Cricket", which in turn links to the site of the "National American Alsatian Club".
 * 9 and 19 derive from Lois Denny/Schwartz, the original breeder.
 * 21, loveofbreeds.com, does not seem to be a reliable source (see for yourself).
 * 4, 7 and 8 have no direct bearing on the subject (4 mentions the American Alsatian in passing, citing Wikipedia).
 * 10 looks reputable, but does not support the citation at all.
 * Sources 3, 5, 15 and 23 are the only sources that can be used to reliably support the facts, make of them what you will:
 * 3: local coverage
 * 5 is inaccessible online, but while its title does seem to indicate that it refers to the subject, it is only cited three times for tangential points, so I am not convinced.
 * 15 is a hardly more than a passing mention; one paragraph (beginning "The American Alsatian (formerly the American shepalute) is so new that no kennel club has heard of it") in an article.
 * 23, petsbypets.com, is the most promising source of all, but it is rather critical of the breed and describes this breed as "emerging", and stresses its newness several times. I quote the summary there: "With less than 2,000 dogs bred in total and only 22 years of breed history, it is far too early to give an ultimate verdict on the advantages and disadvantages of this breed." "A dog breed that will be interesting to watch over the years to come and that could benefit greatly from more independent input regarding health screening and breed recognition."
 * So what do you think? הסרפד (Hasirpad) [formerly Ratz...bo] 02:54, 1 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep AKC Recognition should not be the litmus test for notability. Eric Cable  |  Talk  15:00, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * If the article is deleted, please userfy it to my userspace as I think if the article is deleted, then the breed should be added, at least a small mention, to Dire Wolf. Thanks. Eric Cable  |  Talk  15:05, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment We aren't using AKC recognition as the 'litmus test for notability.' There are numerous breeds that aren't recognized by the AKC but are recognized by groups like the ANKC or the FCI. I listed this dog for deletion because there are few reliable secondary sources to establish notability. Kennel clubs are only one type of these sources but they are not the end-all of them. -- T K K  bark !  16:25, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I would also make the point that this "designer dog" was bred specifically to try to emulate the size and bone structure of an extinct species, the Dire Wolf. That, in my opinion, should count towards notability. Eric Cable  |  Talk  18:09, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * That has nothing to do with notability, at all. The only sources that can verify that information are directly connected with their breed club, meaning that they fail WP:NOTABILITY. There are few secondary sources on this breed and only one is anywhere near reliable. -- T K K  bark !  18:37, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Eric Cable: As for getting a mention in the Dire Wolf page: why should the fact that someone is trying to "hitchhike" on something else's fame make them worth of a mention? הסרפד (Hasirpad) [formerly Ratz...bo] 19:12, 2 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - fails notability guidlines. Not recognized as a breed --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 21:45, 2 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Wikipedia should not be used as a vehicle for promoting your pet hobbies or hobby pets. The lack of official recognition is a serious issue, and the dearth of quality sources supporting it seems to suggest that a group of people may have a vested interest in manufacturing this "pedigree" and obtaining recognition possibly through acceptance here.  Ohconfucius  ping / poke 04:01, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - fails notability.  SagaciousPhil   -  Chat  17:30, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * 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.