Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of alleged sightings of giant sharks


 * 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.  Sandstein  14:06, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

List of alleged sightings of giant sharks
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article was created solely as a WP:content fork for badly sourced info that was removed from the main megalodon article for being insufficient. Later it was moved to the current title in an attempt to save it. The badly sourced info has no place on Wikipedia, other than perhaps as a single sentence in the Megalodon page or shark page, saying "there have been a couple of sightings of giant sharks", but that's about it. FunkMonk (talk) 12:33, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:58, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:58, 1 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete, nothing can be salvaged from here. Also the title makes it sound like it’s supposed to be a rehash of sea monster  User:Dunkleosteus77 &#124;push to talk 14:57, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per my comments on talk page. --Slate Weasel (talk | contribs | uploads) 15:19, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete — This is an unnecessary content fork. Merging is out of the question; the megalodon article, one of the best I have had the pleasure of reading, covers all the essentials of the species.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 22:08, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per above discussion. &#58;bloodofox: (talk) 04:42, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep - The nominator was initially referring to List of alleged megalodon sightings, for which I used sources, a number of which were not been forked from megalodon, but after he said in Talk:List of alleged sightings of giant sharks that "giant predatory sharks" was better, I renamed "List of alleged megalodon sightings" to "List of alleged sightings of giant sharks", and that was what I meant when I said 'closed' was that the initial thing about 'megalodon' was closed, not that others cannot say more there, I rectified that error. Leo1pard (talk) 04:45, 2 December 2018 (UTC); edited 04:48, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * That didn't increase the quality of the sources or made this less of a content fork, though. FunkMonk (talk) 14:12, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Which sources are you referring to, apart from those that had been elsewhere? Leo1pard (talk) 15:20, 2 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete — Does not seem to be a worthwhile article, as per nom. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:02, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete as a poorly sourced content fork and per FunkMonk-- Kev min  § 15:42, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Merge to Megalodon - the modern concept of the cryptid existed before the 21st century. There's not a separate article on Giant shark (cryptid). 17:31, 2 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete its a content fork/poor topic. Legacypac (talk) 17:52, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete – Poorly sourced fringe, without anything significant in need of merging. --tronvillain (talk) 14:11, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. A list of things that may or may not have happened? Ifnord (talk) 19:45, 7 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:241:300:C930:F8D2:1EE7:484D:EC37 (talk) 22:56, 7 December 2018 (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.