Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kentucky meat shower


 * 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 keep. Nomination withdrawn Drmies (talk) 17:12, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Kentucky meat shower

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

What we have is an article from the NYT which reports on reports--probably a slow news day in New York, a good occasion for a tasty little morsel from the backwoods. There is no other sourcing to speak of: just a couple of websites, and the Google Book search on the talk page delivers nothing that might be called reliable or relevant. In other words, Wikipedia is helping to perpetuate a rural legend. Delete. Please. Drmies (talk) 02:16, 22 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep There's likely never going to be an expansive article about this, but it's a unique story that reached national consciousness at one point, and we have no time limit on notability. Scientific American unearthing this event to try to explain it adds to the notability. The article could use some revisions to make it more precise, and some of the other sources are worthless. Overall, I don't think we can charge a veritable news organization with not conducting the necessary checks to validate a story. This NBC News story says it was reported by the NYT over two days and that one of the witnesses was a correspondent of the Louisville Commercial. This article also contains a usable reference from  Royal Microscopical Society of Great Britain.  Stevie is the man!  Talk • Work 11:59, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. In addition to extensive coverage soon after (I've added some details including the fact it was first reported in Scientific American, and done some work on the references), this is one of the most prominent phenomena in Charles Fort's The Book of the Damned; he analyzes it and it's mentioned repeatedly in overviews of his writings. Yngvadottir (talk) 14:40, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep per arguments and sources mentioned. More coverage here.  ABF99 (talk) 15:43, 22 September 2015 (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.