Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dwayyo


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:49, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Dwayyo

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not a notable piece of folklore; coverage includes a few sightings reported in local newspapers but there doesn't seem to be any lasting interest. Seems to be something someone made up on a slow news day. –dlthewave ☎ 03:00, 9 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:41, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:41, 9 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete due to lack of reliable secondary sources. I'm generally an inclusionist, but there really needs to be notable coverage for us to build an article around. &#58;bloodofox: (talk) 03:22, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - It seems non-notable folklore. Nothing of significance found on current online news searches. Kind Tennis Fan (talk) 04:10, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:41, 9 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:SIGCOV. TJMSmith (talk) 04:57, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * The majority of these links are WP:RS fails. Please keep WP:RS in mind when looking for sources—what we need are reliable secondary sources from academics, like we have for all of our quality folklore-related articles. &#58;bloodofox: (talk) 05:38, 9 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Speedy WP:COPYVIO from here(2003 on Wayback) and last paragraph from here. See this article version.&mdash;eric 05:19, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Yikes! &#58;bloodofox: (talk) 05:38, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * No worries, I've tagged it G12. ミラP 15:57, 9 January 2020 (UTC)


 * There were versions of this article in its early history that don't violate copyright, so I have reverted back to one. Any copyright violation in later versions should be dealt with by revision deletion, not speedy deletion of the whole article. I have no opinion as yet on whether this should be kept or deleted, but there is no reason for speedy deletion. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:23, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I've tagged it for revdel. ミラP 20:27, 9 January 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.