Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Animal Hall of Fame


 * 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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was DELETE. &mdash; J I P | Talk 13:55, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

International Animal Hall of Fame
Delete as Probable hoax article. No hits on Google besides those linked back to Wikipedia. If deleted, needs some fixes as I think it has propagated to a few articles. khaosworks (talk • contribs) 00:39, 1 October 2005 (UTC) Joaquin Murietta 05:37, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Clearly a hoax. I gave the anon who's been spreading this stuff a message, but probably needs more. Beyond that, anything that has zero Google hits goes in the rubbish bin.--Sean Jelly Baby? 01:42, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * That's a little harsh. There are obscure things that are perfectly good for articles but non-Googleable. -Splash talk 03:16, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * You're right, it is too harsh. Basically, I was trying to say what you said below, because this is supposed to be an Internet thing.--Sean Jelly Baby? 04:15, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete hoax. --best, kevin  · · · Kzollman | Talk · · · 01:43, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete: this describes an online thing, so Google would find it if it were true. Or, more precisely it would find it if it were true and not completely new. So it is either new, and not-yet-notable, or non-existent. That was tortuous phrasing. Oh, and Whatlinkshere for the article doesn't suggest propagation yet: to what does the nominator refer? -Splash talk 03:16, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The've since been removed as unsourced. I was going to do it myself, but thought that I'd play it safe. For examples, see the histories of Mickey Mouse, Huey, Dewey, and Louie and Barney and Friends. --Sean Jelly Baby? 04:15, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Mea culpa. I decided to remove the links, but I was jumping the gun a bit. Strictly speaking I shouldn't have, really, until the AfD was decided. I'll restore them if anyone wants. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 04:35, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. unverifiable, probably hoax. Andrew pmk | Talk 03:23, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and Merge  A strong argument can be made in favor of keeping, but merging this thorough yet amusing article. Here are the reasons -
 * The author went to a lot of effort and this is an encyclopedic list.
 * There are equally-frivolous, less-amusing related articles, such as
 * List of fictional rabbits
 * Category:Lists of fictional animals
 * Archive of fictional things
 * Category:Famous animals
 * There are external links on this subject such as
 * Index of Famous Animals
 * Famous TV Cartoon Animals
 * In the alternative, we could change this from an article to a list or category.
 * But this isn't a list - it's allegedly a real organization, like the Baseball Hall of Fame or the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Categories are there to list animated characters, and if this is supposed to say which characters are worthy of a particular standard of fame, that's POV. And merge with what, precisely? --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 05:51, 1 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete as hoax unless referenced. If it describes a website that doesn't google, it should probably be deleted as NN too. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd  11:55, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree there is no such Hall of Fame, but why not rename to List of famous fictional animals and merge to the Fictional animals subsection of Fictional character Joaquin Murietta 15:04, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The difficulty there is by what criteria do you consider an animal "famous" enough to warrant inclusion? The lists listed in Fictional character make no assertion of fame, and that's correctly NPOV. To have a list of "famous" fictional animals would be POV because that can be a matter of opinion. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 15:16, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I see your point. How about List of fictional animals? Joaquin Murietta 15:52, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * That would be too long - right now, if you look at Fictional character, there are plenty of lists split by animal type. A list of fictional animals would essentially be a combined list with all of them included. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 16:00, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Just Delete it. Dottore So 18:06, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as unverifiable and POV. FCYTravis 18:53, 1 October 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.