Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blue Blue Sea


 * 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. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 19:30, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Blue Blue Sea

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Non-notable. The sources provided are primarily niche databases or primary, or unreliable like Facebook. No coverage in mainstream sporting publications has been included apart from an obituary and I didn't find any myself. No mention of winning any notable races or competitions. The account that created the article originally appears to be an SPA with a COI, based on their account name. EnPassant♟♙ (talk) 19:25, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:30, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep The fact this horse lived for seven years when it was expected he'd only live for one or two is notable. The article simply needs better sources. TH1980 (talk) 01:20, 11 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Who are you "EnPassant" to pass judgment for all on what is worthy of inclusion?
 * Blue Blue Sea was a real off-track thoroughbred who raced and then was retired with me. I have documentation from vet records to testimony to a published book to back up everything that has been stated.
 * There are articles that have been published about Blue Blue Sea while he was alive.
 * Now you have started a storm because I am going to call on the Blue Blue Sea social media group to refute you.
 * I am sorry about your alleged brain injury. Perhaps we should delete you from your ability to pass judgment on Wiki articles because you have no proof of your alleged injury. Blueblueseaottb (talk) 00:27, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Welcome to Wikipedia! WP:PA 100% applies here. Also, WP:Cooperation matters here as well! And on that, I can't get how this meets WP:N at all. So yes this is not cool! You even on your own talk page acknowledged your own CONFLICT which also gets me here. Ask me about air Cryogenic air (talk) 16:56, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Also are you canvansing here? Really? You have not read the rules here at all! WP:CAN is meant for this, please read it, thank you! Ask me about air Cryogenic air (talk) 17:08, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * "Who are you "EnPassant" to pass judgment for all on what is worthy of inclusion?" – this looks like borderline WP:OWN.
 * BTW, for your information EnPassant has been blocked for sock puppetry.  Invading Invader  (userpage, talk) 20:22, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you! If they need someone to put up this AfD I will take it so it doesn't break the rule of AfDs by deleted people Ask me about air Cryogenic air (talk) 14:11, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete No news or any other sources that meet GNG are critical here. This is while interesting doesn't meet GNG.
 * Ask me about air Cryogenic air (talk) 16:52, 12 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete. I tried to find those "better sources" with Newspapers.Com extended but nothing. Horses generally live >25 years, so having a diagnosis of something and living beyond that to 14 that doesn't make it notable. Possibly the book or its author might be, but this fails WP:GNG. BBQboffin (talk) 06:35, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Sources are largely blog posts on horse-specific sites and don't read as independent journalism in reliable sources. Reywas92Talk 14:15, 13 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Weak delete. So far it does look like that there aren't too many notable sources to be found, and most sources are more so for context rather than general notability. The horse is notable, but not notable enough. Would best belong in another thoroughbred-dedicated wiki.  Invading Invader  (userpage, talk) 20:25, 13 December 2022 (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.