Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Insect rights


 * 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  d elete. - Mailer Diablo 06:05, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Insect rights

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Found this when browsing Category:Animal rights, and to some extent it just reads like a joke. Does not appear to have substantial reliable sources. h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 02:06, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - the sources are also of a comedic nature. digitalemotion  02:33, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete but this deserves a serious article. This is a genuine and encyclopedic topic, many people don't buy honey, or silk clothes, for this reason. The TV series I'm A Celebrity was criticized for its treatment of insects. Some people may find it funny, but it's a topic worth covering. Crazysuit 03:00, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:A. I'm allmost tempted to delete per WP:CSD (nonsense); All references appear to be self-published Ohconfucius 03:38, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - clearly a comic site (it advocates at one point "not purchasing, or consuming any meat, fruits, vegetables, grain, or dairy products"). But as Crazysuit says, it ought to be covered somehow: another example is the production of cochineal. Gordonofcartoon 04:08, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-sense, and any further information about insect rights can be added to animal rights. Bobby1011 04:52, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. L337 kybldmstr 07:14, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Maybe a short mention in Animal rights, but no more. --Blanchardb 09:00, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - even though the content is questionable in that the topic in question is valid, its content could be merged (if not already contained within) into the Animal rights article. An article of this nature standing alone simply can't be sustained. Bungle (talk • contribs) 22:06, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Animal rights and make some mention of this in that article Think outside the box 13:54, 6 November 2007 (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.