Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ch. Felicity's Diamond Jim (James)

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 keep per improvements to prove notability, based on winning the top prize in the top dog show in the world. Bearian 21:36, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ch. Felicity's Diamond Jim (James)

Ch. Felicity's Diamond Jim (James) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Contested prod. No sources cited which offer independent coverage of this dog. One of the sources is run by the dog's owner, and the other is an AKC page which merely proves that the dog won the award. The dog doesn't appear to be possibly notable for any reason other than having won this award, and I'm pretty sure that even that doesn't confer immediate notability. Zetawoof_(ζ) 00:46, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. While we have articles for Category:Famous dogs — for example Blondi, Nipper and er.. the Taco Bell chihuahua, these are actually famous and have generated the kind of coverage that lets us write a useful article. Winning a dog show, even a highly respected one, does not confer any kind of notability outside of the extremely small circle of people who pay heed to such results — presumably, the other entrants. Little coverage in the wider media is generated, and the only information we have is its breed, owner, and the fact that it won that year. There will never be any in-depth coverage around which to base a useful article; we'll never have sources for the struggles this dog has overcome, the great romances of his life, his formative experiences. Should there be a less favourable side to "Jim", we'll never get that kind of balanced coverage from his owner — illegitimate puppies, ankle injuries to the mailman, and fouled pavements will all go unnoticed. In short, this article should be swiftly put to sleep, lest it sire a litter of hundreds of equally unwelcome "winning dog biographies." Thomjakobsen 02:26, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Serious WP:COI issues, especially since these championships increase his stud fees. No other dogs in either Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show or AKC National Championship have their own articles. Although I'm an English Springer Spaniel fan, did rescue for a number of years, and even have an obedience title on my rescue dog, and I've heard from several sources that James excels in areas such as disposition that are often overlooked in the breed ring, the history of the article is one of advertisement, and it decreases my respect for his owners.--Curtis Clark 03:15, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Not notable enough to warrant its own article and reads like an advertisement. --Pharaoh Hound (talk) (The Game) 11:56, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. No independent sources have been given, i.e. independent of the dog's owner and of the organization which awards the prizes he won. Hence the subject fails the WP:N guideline. If there was significant coverage about the dog in the mainstream press, one might consider it notable; but that does not seem very probable. --B. Wolterding 12:11, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Keep. Three articles in the New York Times alone [1]. A nationally televised competition. The winner is better known and more widely covered in professional media than, say, the winner of the "best blowjob" awards that supposedly confers notability on porno performers. VivianDarkbloom 22:36, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Thomjakobsen said it best. Trying to write "biographies" of show dogs simply isn't a job for an encyclopedia. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 12:03, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep - While I don't often find myself agreeing with Vivian, her provision of refs, including this one which indicates that the dog has appeared in major media venues does support notability, albeit quite possibly quickly fading. AKRadecki^Speaketh 16:00, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per all above obviously. Showing up in the NYT does not automatically mandate an encyclopedia entry. Obviously. Gah. Eusebeus 18:41, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Note to closing admin: Eusebeus is stalking me, as to he regularly does to other users who challenge his overzealous deletionism. VivianDarkbloom 21:37, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
    • 1)this isn't the place for a complaint like that...take it to WP:AN/I and 2) I looked briefly at his contribution history, and I see no evidence of that...it's a pretty serious accusation, so please take it to the appropriate place. AKRadecki^Speaketh 00:52, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
• Strong keep Won the most notable competition in his field, and 50 others apparently, well documented by reliable sources... 3 of which I have added to the article. Closer should take into account the unfortunate lateness of my comment/improvement of the article, and the fact that this article now clearly meets WP:N. Most comments were complaints that sources weren't cited yet in the article, or that it should be deleted as a punishment because of who created the article... which are weak and moot arguments at this point anyway. --W.marsh 14:55, 22 October 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.