Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yattle

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 merge to Cattle, can be spun off again once there is more content. Sandstein 05:36, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Yattle

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

Possible hoax, seems very dubious. No sources so it also fails WP:V Questionable notability, only a single article, fails WP:V Rackabello 22:30, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

• This is my first article. The WP article reference is real. I have now included a link to the WP article. Is that better? Semobrooks 22:45, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Subject has received significant coverage in a reliable source, likely more sources exist elsewhere. --Daniel J. Leivick 23:10, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep anything that features a yak, should never be deleted. Not even edited- unless you're from Mongolia, and therefore know about yaks.Merkinsmum
• Weak delete. Only one source to be found, the Washington Post article. Google turns up nothing else on "Yattle". Lack of additionaly sources has me wondering if maybe someone at the Post got duped... Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps•Review?)} 00:49, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
• Weak Keep Has been covered outside. Yet, the article is very small. Expand... Brusegadi 01:44, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as a neologism. One article - a whole one - from the Washington Post, and no indication that the phrase is being used regularly outside of that article - published today. This isn't a well-known or well-used phrase. Tony Fox (arf!) 03:44, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Changed my mind; a merge to cattle would be appropriate. Tony Fox (arf!) 19:43, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

• Weak delete or merge into cattle. This may be a real term but the article is way too small to warrant inclusion. JIP | Talk 07:40, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
• Strong keep Multiple independent reliable sources have been added with which to expand the article. 14:45, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - all of the articles added are reprints of the original article, which appears to have gone out on the AP wire, and the other is a photo gallery associated with the Washington Post. Tony Fox (arf!) 18:18, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
• keep I've actually heard this word being used in a recent movie(I can't remember which one it was). I thought it was a messed up line and a movie goof. Thanks to this article, I now know that it's a real word and what it means. Leonardobonanni 04:07, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep The Washington Post actually just made an article about this subject on Saturday here. Zidel333 15:39, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • That's the problem. The WP article is the ONLY article using this word. Google News search. A regular Google search still only gets 1,100 hits, and most aren't referring to the crossbreed. WP:NEO, people. Tony Fox (arf!) 15:58, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
    • My bad, but I still think it should be kept. I'm going to look for ranching manuels for info. Zidel333 17:53, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
• Merge into cattle per JIP. Even on cattle it would be a very short section, and unless and until there is additional information about the subject it doesn't need its own page. JCO312 19:18, 16 August 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.