Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Parrot harness

That article was first slated for deletion because of copyviolation. Since I was the author of that article that it was supposed to violate, I find it very strange that I was accused of plagiarising myself.
 * As the creator of that article on Parrot Harness, I rather not vote.

Harness for parrots is a very serious subject in the parrot world. Are the voters, one way or other, conversant with either parrots or harness? if not, are they qualified to decide it that should be merged or deleted? On what basis have people decided that "it is not notable either way'?

We even have an entry for Worshipful Company of Coachmakers and Coach Harness Makers and another entry for dildo harness which surely cannot be that relevant to the world. Those did not seem to be bad jokes (which I thought they were). Yet something which are of very serious concerns to parrot lovers are now being debated to be thrown out?[[