Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional dogs (2nd nomination)


 * 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 as a perfectly good list; changes can be discussed on the talk page. Bearian (talk) 01:09, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

List of fictional dogs
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Had its PROD tag removed. I believe this fails WP:NOT--"Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information"; DGG, who removed the PROD, claims it's "not indiscriminate--each is in a notable work". But notability is not inherited--else we would have full articles on every single infinitesimal minor character in any notable work. GJC 22:50, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Notability is inherited in this case, the mantra is primarily meant for weak associations or spinoff articles on minor characters. Neither apply. This list offers people something. It means dogs that do not have separate articles can be searched for in context. So Keep. If this gets deleted, we should check if every dog, especially the bluelinked ones are categorized. Mgm|(talk) 23:59, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I think we should keep this page, there are lots of dog-lovers (including myself) who would love this list tbe kept. It seems someone worked very hard on it, and would be crushed if someone deleted it. Plus this page is really helpful for someone who is looking up fictional dogs, and we have a list of fictional cats, which is not up for deletion.

Elbutler (talk) 00:04, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd gladly put that one up too, for the same reasons, but if the way this one is going is any indication, there's no point.GJC 02:51, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Move to Lists of fictional dogs and split the list into separate, more manageable, and more discriminate lists. I don't think deletion is the way to go in this case. MuZemike  ( talk ) 02:47, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Though fiction articles often present problems at AfD, I think this one is easy. I'd expect, as a minimum requirement, that there will be one or more blue links in each entry, and the fictional dog is going to be mentioned by name in the target article. I'm not too happy with the red links in this article, because they suggest weak referencing, which lessens the case for keeping the article. If a bold participant in this AfD wanted to go remove all the red links I wouldn't complain. (Or they could move those entries to the article Talk page). The List of fictional cats has the red-link disease in a worse form. EdJohnston (talk) 04:12, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep.This list provides one really helpful byway through literary history. The very fact that there are so many fictional dogs suggests the extent to which human-dog interactions and/or anthropomorphic dogs are central to story-telling, from technique to theme.  I used this article when I was writing a book on narrative and evolutionary psychology, and the book would have been worse without this wikipedia piece.Nightspore (talk) 06:15, 1 December 2008 (UTC)Nightspore
 * Keep and consider splitting it later orn the article talk p. . I don't see what notability is not inherited" has to do with this. The items in a list do not have to have full individual notability enough for an article on them, just to have sufficient importance to be not indiscriminate. DGG (talk) 06:35, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Perhaps rename to "List of Dogs in Fiction" and related? List of fictional dogs just sounds like a list of made up dog types. &eta;oian   &Dagger;orever &eta;ew &Dagger;rontiers  06:59, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. Exactly the kind of list that Wikipedia is good at. Splitting or renaming should be discussed on the talk page. Espresso Addict (talk) 18:04, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 03:26, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 03:27, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete Another WP:INDISCRIMINATE  list.  Notability is not inherited from the dozens of entities from all parts of fiction.  May I suggest forming narrower lists, such as dogs in comic strips for example.  Each comes from a source of different notability.  The list of dogs is notable because all entities share the same notability as they are real life dog breeds.  A category would suit this article perfectly as categories don't subscribe to wikipedia's notability standards.  Themfromspace (talk)


 * 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.