Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Snowball (Hurricane Katrina dog)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Keep 23/16. Jtkiefer T | @ | C ----- 22:38, 19 September 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Snowball (Hurricane Katrina dog)

  • Keep- It is difficult if not impossible when there is a story of this magnitude to grasp the enormity of it all at once. In any event of this scale, the stories that often hit home the most, and give the best perspective about what the people who lived through it endured are the stories that bring home the individual and personal tragedies and hardships such as this story does. It is unlikely that people will remember exactly how many people lived through the horrors of the Superdome, or the precise number of buildings destroyed, or even the total of how much money was lost. While those kinds of “metrics” might well be important, they don’t tell the story of the people who lived through the disaster. This is one example of a story that does.
  • Keep - Where else can I get all the facts about this? It's of great concern to those who understand what it's like to be closer to your cat or dog than anyone else in the world. It's not just the story of a dog, it's a statement of our society. An important one.
  • Keep - The level of concern and activity it has generated (websites, organized search efforts, $13,000 in rewards/family donations) and the fact that it is ongoing, (Snowball has not really been found yet as you will find if you go to KatrinaPetfinders.com), is enough reason. There are many, many people who will not forget this story for a long time, if ever.

Don't Delete - Poignantly expresses the displacement and anguish that the Katrina refugees were going through.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.183.24.207 (talk • contribs) 15:32, 9 September 2005

  • Delete It's not notable; it's not knowledge; it's not even news (and if it were it does not belong here); it's trite, not relevant to the subject and a distraction. Nelson50 14:56, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Um. I honestly don't think this will be remembered or notable in a year's time. - mholland 01:01, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

It is kind of strange for an article. I agree it should probably be deleted maybe if it becomes really important it could go in but I don't see how it will no offence I'm glad the dogs okay and all but its not wikipedia worthy i dont think --Shimonnyman 01:10, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. While I hope the dog's OK, I don't think that this topic is notable enough for an article. Capitalistroadster 01:25, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep any thing the press has a field day with like this. We have Numa Numa, which already no one cares about anymore, so why not the puppy? Redwolf24 (talk) 01:39, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge into one of the hurricane articles. the american media has a habit of making the most unnotable things notable, tho not being in the states i dont know how much effort theyre putting into snowball. certainly doesnt warrant more than a sentence. Nateji77 01:40, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete: Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. At this point, the dog is hardly known, and banking on some notability catching up to buoy the article later is too much. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a news portal. Geogre 01:55, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep: Interesting as a minor media phenomenon and one of the primary human interest stories to emmerge thus far from Hurricane Katrina. CNichols 02:12, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

KEEP - it is noteworthy because it has been so widely reported and talked about

  • Keep, partly because I'm in an inclusionist mood, partly because Geogre's reasoning annoys me, since the whole notability of the dog is based on what has already happened, i.e. this news report this article cites—nothing to do with a "crystal ball" whatsoever. Everyking 02:13, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
    • The "Crystal ball" was about whether this particular media belch will still be noticed 6 weeks from now or 6 months from now. Let's establish just how widely discussed this dog is, then realize that in-the-news is not part of article space. This is just a soap bubble, at this point -- some red herring the media chased. When it establishes staying power, it would be useful to document it. There hasn't been enough time for it to establish itself yet, and we're not in the business of predicting which submania of the news services will last and which will not. Geogre 11:04, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
      • But by voting to delete, you are putting yourself in that business. Right? The correct policy to follow if you don't want to be in that business is to let someone make the article if they want, and re-evaluate later. Everyone's notability changes over time. This is a living encyclopedia, and if Snowball is forgotten in a year, delete the article at that point. As you say, it's silly for us to try to predict notability. Tempshill 23:34, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
        • I should point out that this is not the general understanding of notability. We generally view notability as independent of the passing of time; something can't be notable one day and non-notable the next. Everyking 07:46, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Transwiki to Wikinews, where people would look for these sorts of things if they wanted them Ashibaka (tock) 02:56, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
    • No can do; Wikinews is public domain. —Cryptic (talk) 03:18, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
It is possible if you can get the editors who contributed to release it into PD. - Mgm|(talk) 11:08, September 9, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep and do not merge. —RaD Man (talk) 04:51, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete Glurge -EDM 05:00, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, nonnotable. --Angr/tɔk tə mi 07:04, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete absolutely. Non-notable and a good example of confusing immediate exposure with salience over time. Marskell 10:03, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, notable enough to have major coverage with multiple segments on CNN, MSNBC and FNC subsequent to the initial AP reporting. Further, this incident was key in evacuation officials re-visiting the "no pets" policy, and has been used by SPCA and the Humane Society to raise funds for pet relief and evacuation which has already topped donations for Tsunami relief raised earlier this year. --Nicodemus75 11:01, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete as per nom. Colinmac 12:43, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Weak delete per Geogre or merge per Nateji77. If the long-term policy effects suggested by Nicodemus75 are shown to be based on this one dog rather than the general situation, I would change my vote to "keep", but I'm inclined to consider those orgs' use of this dog as their "sad cute face of the week", with no more individual significance than one child in an ad for Save the Children. Barno 14:23, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, This noteable incident reflects the hardships that people suffered as well as animals in a catastrophic event. I would hate to have to compare this to any World War but the human emotion, loss, and surrounding circumstances should reflect in our history. Should we delete the naked Vietamese girl running screaming down the street because no one would remember her name a few years later. Or should we recognise that the true meaning behind our civilization is the fact that we can write read and remember our feelings emotions and history. --User:choolio@rocketmail.com 10:45, 9 September 2005
  • Delete; I've been following Hurricane Katrina quite extensively, and haven't heard of "Snowball". Apparently he's very popular, but it's not encyclopedic, and doesn't deserve its own article. Ral315 14:58, September 9, 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge with the Animal concerns section of the hurricane article. --Fang Aili 16:01, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete flash in the pan news story. Certainly not encyclopedic. Dottore So 16:15, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete Wikipedia isn't the place for this. - Orioneight 17:16, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, some things are a flash in the pan and deserve to be kept. This was an extremely minor flicker of light in an exceptionally large pan, and will vanish into nothingness in about a week. Lord Bob 17:50, September 9, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, it may be news now but it won't be next week.--Isotope23 18:28, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge. Significant symbol and ah hell lost train of thought why am I even writing in English this time of the day --Kizor 19:20, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge' as per Fang Aili. Zoe 20:48, September 9, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete non notable. Johntex\talk 21:04, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge per Fang Aili, just been on SkyNews as I was looking at the article! (10.24 BST) Alf melmac 21:26, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
    An excellent place for it to remain. -EDM 21:28, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep It shows the obstacles pets and their owners faced during the evacuation process.Kiwidude 22:09, September 9, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, it is now illogical to say it's non-notable. In a year's time, re-evaluate. Tempshill 23:13, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. As Tempshill said, let's hold on to this for a while & re-evaluate later. After all, Wikipedia is not paper. -- llywrch 00:23, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge any useful information into the appropriate article and delete. And no, this is not a violation of the GFDL; merging is not copying. Neutralitytalk 01:15, September 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep for now. Minor media phenomenons are still notable. There may be a possibility of merging similar articles together after the dust has settled on Katrina (if you'll pardon the inaccurate metaphor). For now I see no harm. There are other "Katrina notables" that probably warrant their own articles, too.
  • Merge and delete __earth 07:34, September 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Snowball is an important reflection of the losses from Hurricane Katrina OmegaWikipedia 08:00, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge per Fang Ali. Flowerparty 12:38, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. It's a news dog! Neither real world-notable nor encyclopedic. / Peter Isotalo 16:42, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect to the article about animal concerns. Notable story to have on Wikipedia, but there are thousands of dogs like this one. CrazyC83 17:56, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete Glurge --Urbane legend 23:51, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
  • ""Merge and redirect"" The compulsory abandonment of companion animals is important Snowball does not need his own article. Alan 19:56, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
  • KEEP, and MERGE...Who makes all these rules, and why am I only seeing this artical here? No one has a right to decide what is important for someone else, and it is never right to not be very concerned about a minor childs concerns. This artical should go forward as it is very important to reach the public so this child can have his dog returned to him! Thank you, Donna in Texas
    • vote posted to this AfD's talk page by 66.82.9.59 at 10:14, September 16, 2005, moved over here by Lord Bob. Lord Bob 23:54, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
  • KEEP I was surprised and pleased when I put "Snowball" into Yahoo search and found a link to Wikipedia plus a nice list of links. Snowball is the 'poster dog' for all the animals separated from their families and left behind to suffer and die. It's wrong, it's inhumane and traumatic. Many people died rather than leave their pets in New Orleans and along the Gulf coast. We need legistlation and new rules in place, so this entry will show continuing interest in the topic. Please keep it!! 1:20 PM 9/17/05 LLL
  • KEEP then merge at the point when we're sure of his and the boy's wherabouts? Seems to me there's ongoing doubt that Snowball has been found and growing curiousity and concern for his reunion with that poor boy....Bet the Snowball story ain't over yet. ````curious snowball fan
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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.