Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cookie (cockatoo)


 * 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   Speedy keep. Unanimous; article is on main page. JEN9841 (talk) 21:56, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Cookie (cockatoo)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

A rather trivial article about a non-notable bird. Appears to violate WP:NOTNEWS and WP:ONEEVENT too. WossOccurring (talk) 21:23, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - article has a number of independent reliable sources sufficient to establish notability. MikeWazowski (talk) 22:55, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article contains multiple non-trivial mentions in reliable sources. Surprisingly, the bird passes WP:GNG with, er, flying colours. --NellieBly (talk) 02:34, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. - independently sourced my multiple news outlets. Note WP:TRIVIA applies to trivia sections - and not entire articles... nor is it a substitute for WP:IDONTLIKEIT. --Madchester (talk) 03:05, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Per others above.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:49, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Seems fine to me. We have articles on the oldest people; I don't see why we can't have articles on the oldest animals, as long as there is enough material to work with. And in this case, there are many more sources that have yet to be incorporated into the article: The bird has been the primary subject of newspaper articles since 1994, if not earlier, so I don't see how NOTNEWS or ONEEVENT applies. Zagalejo^^^ 08:40, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. - independently sourced my multiple news outlets as noted above. World's oldest psittacine. Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:46, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong and speedy keep – the article is about a cockatoo in its 70s: this is not an event, so WP:ONEEVENT doesn't apply. It's not a news story, so WP:NOTNEWS doesn't apply. As far as I know, WP:BIO redirects to Notability (people), and since cockatoos aren't covered by Wikipedia's notability policy on human beings, that's irrelevant. Out of interest, what would be considered a "notable bird" if not this one? Anyway, the nominator hasn't supplied any other rationale for deletion, and—with the utterly irrelevant link to WP:TRIVIA—this was a bit of a pathetic move, actually. ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  sheriff  ─╢ 14:18, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - all my reasons for keeping are covered above. Freikorp (talk) 19:49, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep multiple sources.Perry Rimmer (talk) 19:52, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep There are multiple sources and a 76 year old cockatoo is certainly notable.KMDelvadiya (contribs) 21:04, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep for reasons stated. This bird is certainly one-of-a-kind.  --PMDrive1061 (talk) 21:12, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Lets snowball this.  DRosenbach  ( Talk 21:16, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Clearly notable, multiple sources, oldest of the species, is cute (lol), and so forth. Speedy-close, please? --an odd name 21:16, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep This is on Wikipedia's main page, so the ugly deletion banner makes Wikipedia look very bad!!! Keep this and end asap.  Nationalparks (talk) 21:31, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Clearly well-sourced, I doubt that one could call a bird that is the oldest of its species un-notable, an nominating a DYK for AFD reduces presentation. -- The Grim  Reaper  21:38, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep User who proposed deletion is mis-interpreting the "trivia" criterion, and the user is incorrect when judging the article to be "non-notable." Analogdrift (talk) 21:39, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * STRONG KEEP Passes all notability requirements. And Cookie rules, may he live for many more years.(User:Misortie)--58.141.104.92 (talk) 21:43, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - as per above. Connormah (talk) 21:49, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Why was this even nominated?  fetch  comms  ☛ 21:52, 28 December 2009 (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.