Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Snowball (Hurricane Katrina dog) (3rd 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 redirect to Pets Evacuation and Transportation Standards Act. Mackensen (talk) 18:18, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Snowball (Hurricane Katrina dog)
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

The article fails the notability criteria. It is not a soapbox, and it is not Wikinews Hurricanehink ( talk ) 21:43, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOT even though I like the story. Ten Pound Hammer  • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps•Review?) 23:52, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge to the Hurricane article as per many suggested in the previous afd.--JForget 00:24, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. It seems to me that notability is best determined by significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject, rather than the opinion of Wikipedia editors. The article could be improved by editing, and the use of inline citations, but the subject and its surrounding discussion is certainly important, notable, and verifiable. It also exhibits historical significance as background to the Pet Evacuation and Transportation Standards Act, and is discussed in this context by notable and reliable sources. It therefore warrants a separate article, and should not be merged. I would like to know how the article fails WP:N and WP:SOAP. --TreeKittens 00:30, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment One problem is that many of the sources in this article are no longer accessible. I've been examining them closely as I have edited the information down (to the provable and necessary) into a separate article on Pets Evacuation and Transportation Standards Act. While the background section in the new article could use expansion--particularly on whether or not Snowball really was found (alas, no sources!) I believe that this article should be redirected accordingly. :) --Moonriddengirl 14:38, 30 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep per TreeKittens. The article's subject was apparently heavily covered by national news. Now, I know Wikipedia is not Wikinews, but given that the dog and the resulting news coverage may have inspired legislation (which needs more sourcing in the article), I think it's a keep. -- B figura (talk) 00:53, 30 August 2007 (UTC) (see below)  B figura  (talk) 17:28, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge per Moonriddengirl. -- B figura (talk) 17:28, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge to the Hurricane article. Actually, I think the article should be substantially pruned and included as a "background" section in a new article on the currently non-existent Pets Evacuation and Transportation Standards Act. I'm tempted to write the article myself, but it's much too late where I am. Maybe somebody in a different time zone will take the initiative. :) (see below)--Moonriddengirl 01:24, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I have created the PETS article (well, am categorizing, so I suppose technically "am creating") in case it seems like an appropriate merge point for this article. I could not include any references to the dispute of Snowball's location, because I could not find any references. --Moonriddengirl 14:34, 30 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Edit down and merge with Hurricane Katrina. - Nascentatheist 02:16, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Pets Evacuation and Transportation Standards Act. (My response has changed significantly enough to warrant a new line, I think.) Not all of the information is included in that new article, but what isn't included is largely not there because it is not Verifiable. Those searching for Snowball would still be able to read verifiable information about him or her, and the legislation seems far more valuable as an article. If other users don't agree with that, I would propose a merger with Social effects of Hurricane Katrina rather than the primary Hurricane Katrina article. There is already a section on animals within that specific document. --Moonriddengirl 15:54, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOT. Mention can be made (per above) at the PETS act page. Eusebeus 18:12, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh good grief. Strong delete, we're not Wikinews. Without sources indicating that the dog did in fact inspire anything, there's nothing for notability here, either. Also, the quotes are copyvios as they aren't referenced and certainly aren't fair use. --Core desat 21:09, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete also per WP:NOT#NEWS.  Current event without much historical notability.   If the bill actually passes, include a small mention about this dog in there Corpx 00:04, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment The bill did actually pass. With an overwhelming majority. In May of 2006. :) Pets Evacuation and Transportation Standards Act. --Moonriddengirl 00:14, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Yea, that's sufficient coverage for this dog.  Delete & Redirect there Corpx 00:42, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NOT, but don't bother with a redirect. Article has only one incoming link (from Social effects of Hurricane Katrina that can and should be retargeted; and "Snowball (Hurricane Katrina dog)" is hardly a plausible search term.--Nilfanion (talk) 01:11, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment This House of Representatives transcript specifically links Snowball to the PETS act . Also this article by Prof. Leslie Irvine of the University of Colorado, published in Animal Liberation Philosophy and Policy Journal in 2006 shows that the dog is still discussed by reliable sources HTML version. These suggest lasting independent notability to me. Thanks a lot to Moonriddengirl for creating that great article though! --TreeKittens 05:57, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * comment Good sleuthing! I've incorporated the transcript into the PETS article. :D --Moonriddengirl 12:39, 3 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Weak keep People, pets, and events can be extremely newsworthy without having the long-term importance appropriate for an encyclopedia, as stated by policy WP:NOT and essay WP:NOTNEWS. But in this case, in addition to the news stories about the added trauma of Katrina evacuees additionally having to abandon their companion animals like Snowball to some unknown hell, the article seems to state that this particular tearful parting was a factor in consideration of national legislation requiring the U.S. emergency preparedness organization to plan for evacuating pets as well as people. The weakness of the "keep" is because it is not specifically a "Snowball law" like other tragedies led to "Amber laws" and the like. Edison 06:38, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * If the link to legislative change can be proven using verifiable references, it's a definite keep. If it can't it's a merge with Hurricane Katrina.  Either way I am against deletion. -- Roleplayer 23:57, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Merging to Hurricane Katrina is inappropriate, as there is nothing here that deserves inclusion on that page. That's especially true if we can't verify the bit that matters... Without the legislation, Snowball is nothing more than a random human interest story. If the link to legislation is established it deserves mentioning in the background to PETS, not an article in its own right.--Nilfanion (talk) 10:35, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I have incorporated the information supplied by TreeKittens into the Pets Evacuation and Transportation Standards Act. It's still my opinion that Snowball should be redirected to that article, though Nilf makes a very good point that it's not likely to be a common search term. Given what TreeKittens shows about the ongoing discussion of Snowball, I do think Snowball might also merit a paragraph in the animal section of Social effects of Hurricane Katrina. I don't think the whole article as it stands should be reproduced there. I'll craft such a paragraph in a bit and put it at Talk:Social effects of Hurricane Katrina in case consensus on this article is to delete. Obviously, it wouldn't be appropriate to place the paragraph if the article is kept. --Moonriddengirl 12:39, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Potential Snowball paragraph for Social effects of Hurricane Katrina now available at Talk:Social_effects_of_Hurricane_Katrina, in case consensus on this article is to delete. --Moonriddengirl 13:09, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Ok, so it seems some agree that the information is verifiable and worthy of inclusion - it is just a matter of where it should be placed. I am sympathetic to your point of view, but I would suggest the the dog deserves only a passing reference in PETS and Hurricane Katrina. The best way of doing this, in my opinion, is to have a small article on the dog, and link to it in the main text of the relevant section of those articles. I don't think the whole background of the dog is relevant to them, but the references (particularly those in the new PETS article) establish notability. Unfortunately, I have not had time to edit the Snowball article to attribute the quotes and improve it, but I think a separate article with proper linking is the most elegant way of presenting the information, rather than spreading it over two or more articles. I agree it is an implausible search term. Thanks, TreeKittens 23:45, 3 September 2007 (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.