Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wolfox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 delete. Carioca (talk) 01:03, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wolfox

Wolfox (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Appears to be a fictional topic for a subculture. No assertation of notability, no sourcing, and I'm having trouble finding any evidence of notability online. Possible hoax? Either way, it probably doesn't belong in Wikipedia at this time. Lawrence Cohen 16:46, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete While some people do roleplay as these (as well as an infinite number of other possible hybrids), it doesn't live up to the cultural notability of the Jackalope or even the Cabbit. Doubt we'd ever find reliable sources ether. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 17:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. We lost Chakat years ago, and this is a _far_ less significant furry-specific species. Tevildo (talk) 18:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete fails to meet the notability guidelines. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:13, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete Would probably even be deleted on WikiFur, it doesn't really say anything beyond what you'd guess from the word itself. GreenReaper (talk) 19:46, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete or A1 Speedy it. Although I'm none too sure it has NO context, it surely has little enough to be a candidate for either of the two. Two One Six Five Five discuss my greatness 19:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Yeah, delete as minimal interest outside the fandom. ('sides, I thought they were folfs.) Tony Fox (arf!) 21:17, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete as unsourced, lacking real world notability.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 01:45, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. The last vestiges of the chakat article survived in a broader topic that wound up having historical significance. No such luck here. Serpent's Choice (talk) 19:02, 5 January 2008 (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.