Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seal Transportation


 * 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. WP:SNOW. The Bushranger One ping only 22:29, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Seal Transportation

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not a good faith article creation. See editor history: Andy Dingley (talk) 15:25, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. 15:30, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:30, 5 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. This article basically exists to let us know that pinnipeds are sometimes transported, and that they can be injured in the course of moving them.  The same holds true of ostriches, flies, tigers, geckoes, mulberry trees, and just about any other living thing that humans find here and would prefer over there.  If it actually contained information on moving marine wildlife, there might be an article here; but this is not it.  - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:30, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * 'KEEP' I do not like these slurs on my name. However, this should be moot when it comes to this article, which carries information about the transportation of seals in a neutral manner which has little to do with my life, history or actions. I also query whether this is grounds to delete an article. If the article about, say, Gloucester was created by a known criminal or villain, it would still be a notable subject. Anthony Seldon (talk) 15:32, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Strong delete. I see zero evidence that the transportation of seals is an encyclopedic topic. -- Kinu  t/c 15:40, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. "Bad faith creation" or a user's contribution history are not in and of themselves valid rationales for deletion, but this article is 100% POV editorializing, and even if it was an encyclopedic topic it would need to be blown up and started over to meet the policy on neutral point-of-view. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 15:43, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - Wikipedia is not an instruction manual -- &#124;  Uncle Milty  &#124;  talk  &#124;  19:09, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete as per WP:NOTMANUAL Wikipedia is not a manual or how to. On a side note the editors history is moot remember WP:AGF  Cameron11598  (Converse) 23:24, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTHOWTO. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:52, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Seal Transportation is no more a How-To guide than Teeth cleaning and to claim so is disengenous. SAVE THE SEAL TRANSPORT Anthony Seldon (talk) 15:13, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - inappropriate tone and content. Deb (talk) 15:28, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. Concur with WikiDan61 and others re. WP:NOTHOWTO.  Moreover, the title is misleading: I would have assumed that the article covered the use of seals as beasts of burden.  If kept, it should be retitled something like "Transportation of seals"; and it would give rise to a raft of other pinniped-care-and-maintenance articles, e.g. "Feeding of captive seals", "Skin care for seals", "Dental care for seals", &c., &c.  Ammodramus (talk) 15:43, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete User is not here to help. An additional nonsense article was created today, which forced another AFD. § FreeRangeFrog croak 19:44, 7 March 2013 (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.