305:
The
Tibetian Mastiff has been around for thousands of years but just became AKC recognized a couple years ago. Should the article on it have been deleted prior to AKC registration? *Furthermore, as the author of the artice, having put a good amount of effort into looking things up, learning the way to code a Knowledge article, and making it a point to use the dog breed template, I feel all I am hearing here is "this article stinks and the author should be beat to a pulp for being a moron" when what I think "here is the problem with the article, and how you can improve it" would be more in the sprit of Knowledge. *Finally, I am a little confused about this 'orginal synthesis' thing. How can anything that is not plagarism not be original synthesis?
500:. Not every combination of two breeds is notable - there are hundreds of AKC-recognized breeds, and thus tens of thousands of possible pairings (even once you exclude the totally implausible ones). Lacking any documentation that this is a particularly popular pairing, and noting in particular the article's admission that "this hybrid is not very common", there's no reason to preserve it. Google searches for the article's title and Spanish dictionary entries for the words "dwarf" and "dog" don't cut it as sources.
304:
To the person who said "I don't see why major or popular cross-breeds shouldn't be included to be honest." Thanks for that. If this article is deleted simply because this hybrid is not a common one, then to be fair every hybrid dog article needs to be deleted. Question is, where do you draw the line?
282:
This is original synthesis at its worst. There are 12 sources, one about a Google search, but most about either
Chihuahua, or about a Corgi, in an attempt to confirm that "this mixture was bound to happen". If you place a male and a female dog, each of a different breed, in the same yard, a mixture
520:
The fact there is apparently not a hundred puppy mills out there cranking these dogs out by the gross is NOT is good reason to delete the article. You mention the AKC. Does that mean every dog breed that is not AKC recognized should not have an article? If a person owns a particular hybrid and there
639:
Why is it I feel like the "cool kids" of
Knowledge are ganging up on me here? As I've said before, what is going to be the measuring stick here? AKC Registration? The fact that a breed is 'notable' because there is a lot of puppy mills out there produing the breed? If the former, then please say so
323:
that discuss this cross-breed. If you can find reliable sources, please do, and note that in this debate. "Original synthesis" just means there are no reliable sources available about this hybrid in particular. You simply took sources about each of the breeds individually (that is, sources about
525:
does it hurt if that person creates the article as long as there is no 'original synthesis' or copyright infringement? That is where this article currently stands. The Google search you mention is used to demonstrate that this hybrid is called a number of different portmanteau names, nothing
648:. You will note that not only was is nothing more than a hybrid breed FIVE years ago (prior to full AKC recognition) but is it also VERY uncommon. So by the rationale that a breed must be 'notable' should the Toller article be removed as well?--
577:
I would like at this time to request that the deletion process for this article be put on hold so I can attempt to find better sources for it. I just got a lead on a book that might be able to help me. Thanks.
283:
is bound to happen. Like Leho says, we can't do an article about every single hybrid out there. There's nothing cited so far that this is a notable hybrid. It's worth a mention in the article about
414:, per Mansford. Almost all the references are either about Corgi or about Chihuahua breeds individually. No significant coverage of the hybrid breed itself to show its notability.
324:
chihuahuas by themselves and sources about corgis by themselves) and synthesized (combined) them to draw your own conclusions about what characteristics the hybrid breed has.
193:
436:
All original thought, oops I mean 'original synthesis' has been removed. Non-portmanteu name section will remain as it is translation from Welsh to
English to Spanish.
124:
695:
716:
that provide substantial coverage of the Corgi-Chihuahua hybrid, that these searches do not fish out, then great, otherwise the article will have to be deleted.
700:
698:
681:
664:
I don't think anyone is ganging up on you here. I chose this AfD to participate basically at random. Speaking for myself, I would like to see the basic
680:
for comparison, such in-depth coverage of that breed is easy to find. E.g. a GoogleNews search for "Nova Scotia Duck-Tolling
Retriever" gives 138 hits
644:
other hybrid article. If the later, "yes, only hybrids that are 'notable' will be tolerated" then I would to point out the AKC-recognized breed
319:
In response to your comment on my talk page, I have no problem with articles on cross-breeds in particular. The problem is that there are
686:
91:
86:
708:, again none of which providing in-depth coverage of the breed. It seems pretty clear that "Nova Scotia Duck-Tolling Retriever" passes
677:
645:
480:
95:
451:
78:
267:
17:
706:
703:
692:
738:
209:
Is wikipedia is going to do an article for every new "Designer breed" hybrid that people come up? Currently I am
36:
737:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
725:
689:
657:
631:
587:
563:
535:
511:
488:
484:
474:
455:
423:
404:
372:
352:
333:
314:
296:
271:
242:
224:
201:
182:
148:
60:
465:
I just struck the !vote because you're only allowed one bolded vote comment. You already voted keep above.
470:
82:
684:
653:
583:
531:
447:
439:
348:
310:
220:
178:
74:
66:
329:
292:
237:
196:
144:
558:
506:
466:
368:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
600:
131:
I cannot find any reliable sources discussing this hybrid. The current article consists of
721:
649:
624:
579:
527:
443:
419:
344:
306:
216:
174:
705:, all of which appear to be passing mentions. The same search of GoogleBooks gives 5 hits
325:
288:
261:
236:. I don't see why major or popular cross-breeds shouldn't be included to be honest. --
140:
51:
192:. References should be improved, but there are some sources out there for the Chigi
640:"yes, AKC recognition is required for an article" and I will hapily support deleting
608:
553:
552:
an example of original synthesis (as there are no reliable sources to base it upon).
501:
389:
136:
713:
676:, such as books, articles in newspapers and magazines, etc. Taking your example of
673:
612:
611:. If the breed becomes notable in the future, it won't be a problem to find actual
604:
162:
132:
112:
362:
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
254:
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
709:
665:
596:
284:
158:
544:
The fact that there doesn't appear to be any community of breeders of this dog
717:
618:
415:
234:
548:
a good reason to delete the article, though, as is the fact that the article
702:. By comparison, a GoogleNews search for "Corgi-Chihuahua" returns 10 hits
166:
384:
683:, several of them articles specifically about the breed itself, such as
215:
about this article because I don't know if this hybrid is notable.
731:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
668:
requirements to be satisfied: that is, significant coverage of
697:, again including some specifically about the breed, such as
195:
although whether they are reliable is another question.--
712:
while "Corgi-Chihuahua" does not. If you can find other
119:
108:
104:
100:
367:
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
259:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
233:It looks like this sort of article is nothing new
161:using Google, News, Books. The closest thing to a
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
741:). No further edits should be made to this page.
694:. The same search in GoogleBooks gives 143 hits
8:
139:based on descriptions of each dog breed.
390:
7:
157:I can't find anything demonstrating
678:Nova Scotia Duck Tolling Retriever
646:Nova_Scotia_Duck-Tolling_Retriever
434:-Heavily Edited by article creator
24:
521:is no article for it, then what
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
758:
61:22:36, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
726:05:01, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
658:04:08, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
632:19:23, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
588:04:29, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
564:14:57, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
536:04:16, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
512:01:52, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
489:01:06, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
475:23:11, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
456:16:58, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
424:14:52, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
405:14:48, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
373:14:07, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
353:18:39, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
334:03:30, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
315:21:29, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
297:11:52, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
272:21:24, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
243:01:31, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
225:18:50, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
202:20:16, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
183:22:53, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
149:22:34, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
734:Please do not modify it.
670:this hybrid specifically
32:Please do not modify it.
690:Encyclopedia Britannica
637:Give me a break already
603:which is essentially
321:no reliable sources
137:original synthesis
44:The result was
630:
458:
442:comment added by
383:per Mandsford. —
375:
287:, but that's it.
274:
133:original research
59:
749:
736:
714:reliable sources
688:and an entry in
674:reliable sources
629:
627:
621:
616:
613:reliable sources
437:
402:
401:
397:
393:
387:
366:
364:
258:
256:
122:
116:
98:
58:
56:
49:
34:
757:
756:
752:
751:
750:
748:
747:
746:
745:
739:deletion review
732:
625:
619:
617:
562:
510:
399:
395:
391:
385:
360:
270:
252:
169:, and it ain't
118:
89:
75:Corgi-Chihuahua
73:
70:
67:Corgi-Chihuahua
52:
50:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
755:
753:
744:
743:
728:
661:
660:
634:
590:
571:
570:
569:
568:
567:
566:
556:
539:
538:
515:
514:
504:
494:
493:
492:
491:
477:
460:
459:
427:
426:
408:
407:
377:
376:
365:
357:
356:
355:
343:per Mandford.
338:
337:
336:
299:
276:
275:
266:
257:
249:
248:
247:
246:
245:
239:Deadly∀ssassin
228:
227:
204:
198:Deadly∀ssassin
186:
185:
129:
128:
69:
64:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
754:
742:
740:
735:
729:
727:
723:
719:
715:
711:
707:
704:
701:
699:
696:
693:
691:
687:
685:
682:
679:
675:
671:
667:
663:
662:
659:
655:
651:
647:
643:
638:
635:
633:
628:
622:
614:
610:
606:
602:
598:
594:
591:
589:
585:
581:
576:
573:
572:
565:
560:
555:
551:
547:
543:
542:
541:
540:
537:
533:
529:
524:
519:
518:
517:
516:
513:
508:
503:
499:
496:
495:
490:
486:
482:
478:
476:
472:
468:
464:
463:
462:
461:
457:
453:
449:
445:
441:
435:
433:
429:
428:
425:
421:
417:
413:
410:
409:
406:
403:
398:
388:
382:
379:
378:
374:
370:
363:
359:
358:
354:
350:
346:
342:
339:
335:
331:
327:
322:
318:
317:
316:
312:
308:
303:
300:
298:
294:
290:
286:
281:
278:
277:
273:
269:
264:
263:
255:
251:
250:
244:
241:
240:
235:
232:
231:
230:
229:
226:
222:
218:
214:
213:
208:
205:
203:
200:
199:
194:
191:
188:
187:
184:
180:
176:
172:
168:
167:this web page
164:
160:
156:
153:
152:
151:
150:
146:
142:
138:
134:
126:
121:
114:
110:
106:
102:
97:
93:
88:
84:
80:
76:
72:
71:
68:
65:
63:
62:
57:
55:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
733:
730:
669:
641:
636:
592:
574:
549:
545:
522:
497:
481:75.181.44.27
467:Calliopejen1
431:
430:
411:
394:
380:
369:Sean Whitton
361:
340:
320:
301:
279:
260:
253:
238:
211:
210:
206:
197:
189:
170:
154:
130:
53:
45:
43:
31:
28:
601:portmanteau
597:Googlewhack
438:—Preceding
285:Hybrid dogs
650:WaxonWaxov
580:WaxonWaxov
528:WaxonWaxov
444:WaxonWaxov
345:Lehoiberri
307:WaxonWaxov
217:Lehoiberri
175:Ryan Paddy
159:notability
54:Sandstein
326:Mangostar
289:Mandsford
262:Jauerback
141:Mangostar
599:-worthy
554:Zetawoof
502:Zetawoof
452:contribs
440:unsigned
125:View log
526:more.--
523:exactly
212:Neutral
207:Comment
173:close.
92:protect
87:history
620:Frank
593:Delete
498:Delete
479:oops.
412:Delete
381:Delete
341:Delete
280:Delete
155:Delete
120:delete
96:delete
46:delete
718:Nsk92
642:every
626:talk
595:this
416:Nsk92
268:dude.
163:WP:RS
123:) – (
113:views
105:watch
101:links
16:<
722:talk
710:WP:N
666:WP:N
654:talk
584:talk
575:Wait
532:talk
485:talk
471:talk
448:talk
432:KEEP
420:talk
349:talk
330:talk
311:talk
302:Keep
293:talk
221:talk
190:Keep
179:talk
171:that
145:talk
135:and
109:logs
83:talk
79:edit
672:by
609:SYN
386:Hex
165:is
724:)
656:)
623:|
615:.
605:OR
586:)
578:--
550:is
546:is
534:)
487:)
473:)
454:)
450:•
422:)
400:❞)
396:?!
392:(❝
371:/
351:)
332:)
313:)
295:)
223:)
181:)
147:)
111:|
107:|
103:|
99:|
94:|
90:|
85:|
81:|
48:.
720:(
652:(
607:/
582:(
561:)
559:ζ
557:(
530:(
509:)
507:ζ
505:(
483:(
469:(
446:(
418:(
347:(
328:(
309:(
291:(
265:/
219:(
177:(
143:(
127:)
117:(
115:)
77:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.