Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maltese tiger


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 08:18, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Maltese tiger

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

per WP:HOAX. noone has ever seen one, it's just "reported". Should NOT have an article. This is just gossip. LADY LOTUS • TALK 10:39, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. WP:HOAX only applies if the article is trying to trick the reader into believing something. This is a reasonably neutral article on a reported Cryptid. It has had a book written about it by Cadwell, inspired a fictional novel In Search of the Blue Tiger, and I found coverage of the claim in 1o9 and ChinaDaily. JTdale   Talk
 * Did you even read what the book was about? It's not about actually finding a blue tiger, it's about a boy interested in tigers and becomes friends with a librarian. And I don't consider io9 a reliable source. The China Daily source title is "Meet Big Foot's Chinese cousin", that doesn't help your case any. And yes I do feel like this is in your words "trying to trick the reader into believing something", there are now photoshopped images of this tiger posted on social media, example Pinterest, where people believe this to be real. LADY LOTUS • TALK 16:45, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I said inspired. And so what? How does that not help my case? Cryptids are certainly able to have articles, because they are something that has a major place in human society as proven by the endless interest they attract. And it is not our business if people are putting hoaxes on other websites. In fact, that would make me say that even more this needs a good quality article on the issue discussing the Maltese Tiger. JTdale   Talk 00:21, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep Not a hoax article (states "reported but unproven") per se, but definitely needs fixing and additional sources. Genetics and Possible distribution sections seems to contain quite an amount of original research IMHO.  野狼院 ひさし  Hisashi Yarouin 13:53, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:24, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organisms-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:24, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:24, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:24, 26 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Weak keep - Articles about cryptids need to be carefully worded per WP:FRINGE, but just a casual look through the first pages of a gsearch brings up sufficient sources to satisfy WP:GNG. --&mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 03:20, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - Let this page stay. Even though it's a cryptid, it has made some media appearances like in an episode of The Secret Saturdays. --Rtkat3 (talk) 15:41, 1 November 2014 (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.