Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murray River Curly Coated Retriever (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 delete. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 12:42, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Murray River Curly Coated Retriever
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Still not notable, sources given here are "easypetmd" which looks like one of many dog breed clickbait websites with little to no curation, a brief article about them (and apparently the only one per google news other than a photograph of a meet), and the breed website.  T K K ! bark with me! 00:06, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! Baby miss  fortune 02:17, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! Baby miss  fortune 02:17, 20 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete I cannot find anything to support WP:NEXIST to support WP:GNG, which is rather odd if this breed has been around since the late 1800s, while there is plenty to support GNG for the Curly Coated Retriever (CCR), which is supposed to be a different breed.  Also the image in the article is NOT labelled at its source as a MRCCR just as a CCR! Aoziwe (talk) 13:42, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete – Nothing particularly notable about the subject. Majority of info on it is from the Murray River Retriever interest group's website. Only mention from an independent reliable source is about how that interest group is upset that it's considered a 'design-breed' and not a pure-bred dog. The group claims the breed has been around 150 years and differs genetically from the Curly Coated Retriever but there are no independent, reliable sources to back this up. Doesn't pass GNG. Kb.au (talk) 10:11, 21 December 2017 (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.