Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grey wolf protection argument


 * 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. WP:SNOW  MBisanz  talk 21:58, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Grey wolf protection argument

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

CSD declined. Article has essay and pure hoax. ApprenticeFan talk  contribs 12:59, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - POV pushing, no real content. AlexTiefling (talk) 13:44, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, agreed: a semi-literate editorial essay. Any legitimate concerns could be added to the gray wolf or wolf reintroduction articles. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:04, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - fails WP:NPOV and lacks sources so no way of knowing if it is original research - but I rather believe it is. --bonadea contributions talk 14:06, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - It's either a POV-fork on the one hand, or original research/essay on the other. Either way, I'm afraid it doesn't mean the standards for inclusion. Cool3 (talk) 15:21, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: per nom --drhlajos (talk) 16:25, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as an unsourced POV essay. Even if expanded, sourced and made neutral it would be nothing but a partial duplication of content that belongs at Gray wolf. ~ mazca  t 18:59, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, but is the content far from salvageable?-Caspian blue 05:35, 9 April 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.