Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Animal

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Deletion Sorting
Project

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Animal. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Animal|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Animal. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch

Animal

[edit]

FAIRR Initiative

[edit]
FAIRR Initiative (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This organisation fails WP:NORG. Sources are none other than routine coverage. GTrang (talk) 04:13, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jade (sea lion)

[edit]
Jade (sea lion) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The sources are just routine coverage of an animal being shot and killed. The media has not covered the story since then. ―Panamitsu (talk) 01:23, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Genlin

[edit]
Genlin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Highly promotional and of very questionable notability over a WP:SUSTAINED period. Amigao (talk) 03:22, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Agree that the article as written seems quite promotional in tone, and it seems there might possible be conflict on interest concerns, but those are both things to be fixed through editing, not AfD nominations. If you want to go through and reword all the promotional parts, have at it. There seems to be more than enough coverage to establish notability though (some sources aren’t great, but there are enough that are to establish notability). As for WP:SUSTAINED arguments… I see sources from 2016 - 2024 so I can’t see how it applies here? Absurdum4242 (talk) 16:43, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed, definitely needs cleanup but WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. Keep but WP:STUBIFY is appropriate. DCsansei (talk) 11:59, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:48, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article seems to have a circular logic to it. Genlin is notable for funding World Dog Alliance, but I cannot find RS to show World Dog Alliance is notable. The whole table in the middle Contributions by Genlin/ World Dog Alliance conflates the two and can be considered original research. for example The joint efforts of Genlin and lobbyists succeeded in convincing Republic Congressman Jeff Denham to include a ban on dog meat consumption into the 2018 Farm Bill passed on 12 December 2018 in the House of Representatives. The bill obtained bipartisan support, notably from Democratic Congressman Alcee Hastings, who had earlier co-sponsored a separate bill to Congress (H.R. 1406 - To amend the Animal Welfare Act to prohibit the slaughter of dogs and cats for human consumption[1]) to ban consumption of dog and cat meat but did not succeed in garnering enough support for a standalone bill on animal rights. The 2018 Farm Bill was successfully passed alongside with other agricultural and food policies. the footnote is to the actual bill which does not mention either Genlin or World Dog Alliance. Many other blocks of text in the table do the same thing, state that Genlin has affected some sort of change without proper citations. I cannot see how this article can be stubified. I am hampered by lack of Chinese. I realize that WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP, but this falls under WP:TNT.--WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:32, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Wouldn't the passage cited as original research be essentially the same as those promotional parts that Absurdum4242 had already suggested for re-wording / taking out? To suggest taking down the entire page because of those parts seems drastic when the rest of the page is properly referenced. This would be more WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP to me rather than WP:TNT. As previous commentators suggested, there are enough references that are good enough here albeit in different languages. Genlin is Chinese / Japanese, and it must be expected that some of his related sources will be Chinese. With instant translation easier than ever on most browsers, language barrier seems to be a very low bar to suggest for page deletion in my opinion. As for the point about the passage being circular and Genlin being conflated with Word Dog Alliance, I have found another source from 2024 on Chosun Daily (Korea's largest newspaper media, printed in Korean) which is a feature article on the works of both. If a reputable media can print a story about the two together because the two are inherently close, I cannot see why it should pose a reason for suggesting this page be taken down. Here is the link to article I mentioned (please forgive my relative lack of Wiki finesse here meaning I cannot put this into a reference section) -- https://www.chosun.com/international/2024/02/27/ODZKDBS6QJG4NOAZFTST4SQJH4/
The same article would also seem to suggest that Genlin is in fact close with Jeff Denham (quoted in the block of texts in question) as the two travel together to South Korea to meet the Korean legislators there to discuss laws to stop the dog meat trade. That being said the particular passage in question still lacks proper citations and I do agree a few other parts of the page also needs rewriting / taken out and/or better citations. EAWDA (talk) 04:38, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here is another source on the BBC from 2018 quoting World Dog Alliance. This source was not cited on this Wiki page but I reckon it adds to the point about it being notable.
https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-45085514 EAWDA (talk) 07:18, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Text - H.R.1406 - 115th Congress (2017-2018): To amend the Animal Welfare Act to prohibit the slaughter of dogs and cats for human consumption". www.congress.gov. 23 March 2017. Retrieved 18 January 2025.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus here yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:09, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as per my reply to WomenArtistUpdates above (didn't realize the existence of a 3rd discussion at the time of my posting, so my entries above should've been posted here given the timing of my comments was after this 3rd discussion started. If anyone feels it necessary for me to delete my comments above and repost them here please let me know). EAWDA (talk) 09:29, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments EAWDA has !voted twice. I stand by my opinion that this is article does not show notability of either Genlin or World Dog Alliance. Below is a source assessment table which shows the number of primary sources, press releases, and irrelevant citations. Looking at the history of the page, the overwhelming activity is from SPAs. World Dog Alliance draft was rejected back in [8] I hope another editor can weigh in on this article to create a consensus. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:58, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source assessment table
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
Yes Yes No Shanghai university passing mention of Peng Hongling as an honorary director ✘ No
No No No Puffy biographical info on WDA (primary source) ✘ No
page from wayback machine. I cannot translate text ? Unknown
No interview with puffy interview ✘ No
page from wayback machine. I cannot translate text ? Unknown
page from wayback machine. I cannot translate text ? Unknown
page from wayback machine. I cannot translate text ? Unknown
Wenhui Daily News culture listing for anti-consumption of dog meat with puffy interview of Peng Hongling ? Unknown
South China Morning Post promo piece in the weekend section ? Unknown
No IMDB No No IMDB ✘ No
No IMDB No No IMDB ✘ No
Animal Protection Association of the Republic of China NGO promotion of World Dog Day ? Unknown
Yes Yes No article covering the passage of "Taiwan: Animal Protection Law Amended' no mention of Peng Hong Ling ✘ No
NewTalk 新頭殼 ~ Peng Hong Ling comment on the passage of "Animal Protection Act" ? Unknown
No No An open letter from the Movement Group to President Tsai "Incorporating Animal Protection into the Constitution" No OpEd ✘ No
Yes Yes Lobbying Firm Profile: Missy Edwards Strategies No passing mention of World Dog Alliance an a donor ✘ No
Yes Yes Lobbying Firm Profile: Prime Policy Group No passing mention of World Dog Alliance an a donor ✘ No
Yes Yes No passing mention of World Dog Alliance an a donor ✘ No
No Animal Friendly Network No churnalish about "The World Dog Alliance (WDA), which is committed to promoting legislation in the United States, is the source of this huge wave" ✘ No
Yes Yes No not mentioned in this legislative listing ✘ No
Yes Yes No not mentioned in this legislative listing ✘ No
No No No petition on World Dog Alliance site (primary) ✘ No
No No No PRESS RELEASE: Paid Content from ACCESS Newswire. The AP news staff was not involved in its creation. ✘ No
No no mention of Genlin ✘ No
No article about dog meat. no mention of Genlin ✘ No
No article about 'Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs: Dogs have been "specialized" as companion animals and should not be included in livestock and poultry management.' no mention of Genlin ✘ No
WORLD ANIMAL NEWS No Victory! Jakarta Bans The Dog & Cat Meat Trade Making It The 21st Jurisdiction In Indonesia To End The Barbaric Industry - no mention of Genlin ✘ No
No No No PRESS RELEASE: Paid Content from ACCESS Newswire. The AP news staff was not involved in its creation. ✘ No
No No Written Evidence submitted by World Dog Alliance (WDA)(AAB0002) No primary source ✘ No
No mention of World Dog Alliance as one of the supporting organizations ✘ No
Yes Yes "Could Chinese millionaire be reason for real estate industry nightmare?". paywalled, but lloks like an article about the purchase of real estate in LA. ? Unknown
No No No article on World Dog Alliance site. (primary) ✘ No
paywalled ? Unknown
No No No press release ✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.
  • Note that my keep above is not based on sources that are currently in the article and I suggested WP:STUBIFY is appropriate. The source assessment shows no indication that a WP:BEFORE search has been complete. There is substantial coverage of his lawsuit against his former property broker for misrepresenting his house's square footage (including secondary coverage about its effects on the real estate market) [9] with national coverage in ABC [10] and the New York Times [11]. There's also coverage of his attempt to buy a seat in the Japanese Diet [12]. A number of articles used in the Japanese Wikipedia article also appear to be significant coverage [13] [14] [15] [16]. Note that most of the sources I found are only in Japanese (or Chinese used in the Japanese Wikipedia) so it's very likely that if someone who is competent in Chinese were to do a native-language search for sources more would be found, but I think this provides more than enough to meet the minimum for GNG. DCsansei (talk) 14:01, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment DCsansei has !voted twice. Also noting that There is substantial coverage of his lawsuit against his former property broker for misrepresenting his house's square footage does not move this dilettante millionaire anywhere closer to notable --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 18:44, 26 January 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Delete. The claim of notability in the first paragraph is "named as an Outstanding Alumni" of their university and that is not a good sign as this is not a highly prestigious award that would indicate that they are regarded as an important figure. The sources I have checked as well as the source assessment table above make clear that this is not a notable topic as it has not received significant, sustained coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Asparagusstar (talk) 02:45, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Animal&oldid=1271695168"