Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MarineMeat


 * 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 Gah!. How confusing. Discussion ongoing at Articles for deletion/MarineMeat (2nd nomination) Fences  &amp;  Windows  02:45, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

MarineMeat

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  AfD statistics)

Pretty standard WP:NOTNEWS ; no other source apart the CNN link. Cycl o pia talk  14:19, 13 December 2009 (UTC) Withdrawn thanks to helpful comments by User:Everyking. There is some coverage and I feel some more source-digging is warranted before taking a decision. I think the best way to deal with it is to propose some merge target. -- Cycl o pia talk  13:01, 16 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete The incident appears to have had no lasting significance. No current presence in Google. --MelanieN (talk) 14:41, 13 December 2009 (UTC)MelanieN
 * Delete: Per WP:NOT. Joe Chill (talk) 17:16, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:NOTNEWS Groundsquirrel13 (talk) 23:04, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, it has one major press source already given, and I'd be very surprised if there are no others out there. Everyking (talk) 00:59, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I was surprised too, but found none. If you find some other source, I will be glad to withdraw. -- Cycl o pia talk  01:11, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, here you go. That's from the Los Angeles Times. Everyking (talk) 01:28, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I am half-convinced. I mean, I also looked again, and what can be found does not lend credence this is indeed notable in itself. It seems a one-off thing that lasted a day -which would be fine with me if there is vast coverage, but it seems not the case. Perhaps the best thing is to merge it somewhere, like in Don't ask, don't tell? -- Cycl o pia talk  01:43, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, one of the sources is from January 2001, and the other is from June 2001. So it wasn't something that just got attention for one day and was forgotten. Bear in mind that news sources for things that happened in 2001 can be surprisingly scarce on the Internet&mdash;it's very likely that there are more sources than that, including some that appeared only in print. Everyking (talk) 02:00, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Incline to agree. Withdraw for now. -- Cycl o pia talk  12:59, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fences  &amp;  Windows  15:10, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete not often I agree with Cyclopia but .. yeah, WP:NOTNEWS, also unreferenced -  A l is o n  ❤ 01:21, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * I've reopened and relisted this: a nominator cannot decide to speedy keep unilaterally if others have argued to delete. See Speedy keep. Fences  &amp;  Windows  15:12, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  --  Fences  &amp;  Windows  15:14, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.  --  Fences  &amp;  Windows  15:14, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  --  Fences  &amp;  Windows  15:15, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I already recognized my clumsy error, but there is also already a second AfD on the thing. Reopening this creates two different AfDs on the same article. -- Cycl o pia talk  00:13, 21 December 2009 (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.