Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Furry fandom


 * 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, nominator stated that this was placed in error (see this comment). Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 23:32, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Furry fandom

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Wikipedia:NOT Vashir (talk) 22:54, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep This is an eight year old article, so WP:SNOW surely applies. Mangoe (talk) 22:59, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep - I'd be curious to know what part of WP:NOT this is supposed to go against. It's a verifiable, well referenced and long-standing article. There's no reason to delete. Tony Fox (arf!) 23:01, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep - Article is well documented, cites plenty of sources. Subject matter attracts more than enough interest from the general public to justify an article As Tony Fox asks, what part of WP:NOT finds this article lacking? This AfD nomination borders on being a misuse of process. --Mwalimu59 (talk) 23:13, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Furry keep Article is very well sourced. I would trust 's judgment here. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 23:18, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Whoops Sorry, apparently the page didn't load completely, which led to me placing this AfD. Please keep then. --Vashir (talk) 23:29, 4 March 2008 (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.