163:
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 β 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."
191:
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
121:
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
162:
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 β presumably, the other entrants. Little coverage in the
371:. 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. --
251:. 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.
366:
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
114:
87:
82:
91:
74:
337:
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.
133:
363:
236:
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. --
232:
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
70:
62:
375:
350:
328:
319:
307:
282:
255:
240:
220:
196:
167:
56:
17:
324:
Note to closing admin: Eusebeus is stalking me, as to he regularly does to other users who challenge his overzealous deletionism.
294:
one which indicates that the dog has appeared in major media venues does support notability, albeit quite possibly quickly fading.
180:
78:
291:
390:
36:
315:
per all above obviously. Showing up in the NYT does not automatically mandate an encyclopedia entry. Obviously. Gah.
184:
249:
389:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
263:
Thomjakobsen said it best. Trying to write "biographies" of show dogs simply isn't a job for an encyclopedia.
188:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
215:
210:
143:
372:
325:
252:
348:
305:
155:
237:
205:
128:
193:
164:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
334:
229:
179:
issues, especially since these championships increase his stud fees. No other dogs in either
176:
49:
290:- While I don't often find myself agreeing with Vivian, her provision of refs, including
339:
296:
264:
368:
233:
316:
123:
204:. Not notable enough to warrant its own article and reads like an advertisement. --
53:
108:
362:
Won the most notable competition in his field, and 50 others apparently,
151:
147:
122:
I'm pretty sure that even that doesn't confer immediate notability.
52:, based on winning the top prize in the top dog show in the world.
383:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
333:
1)this isn't the place for a complaint like that...take it to
104:
100:
96:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
393:). No further edits should be made to this page.
248:. Three articles in the New York Times alone
8:
187:have their own articles. Although I'm an
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
61:
71:Ch. Felicity's Diamond Jim (James)
63:Ch. Felicity's Diamond Jim (James)
24:
181:Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show
50:improvements to prove notability
1:
142:. While we have articles for
376:14:55, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
351:00:52, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
329:21:37, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
320:18:41, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
308:16:00, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
283:12:03, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
256:22:36, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
241:12:11, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
221:11:56, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
197:03:15, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
168:02:26, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
134:00:46, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
57:21:36, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
410:
185:AKC National Championship
386:Please do not modify it.
189:English Springer Spaniel
32:Please do not modify it.
144:Category:Famous dogs
230:independent sources
156:Taco Bell chihuahua
218:
213:
401:
388:
345:
344:
302:
301:
280:
277:
274:
271:
216:
211:
208:
112:
94:
34:
409:
408:
404:
403:
402:
400:
399:
398:
397:
391:deletion review
384:
364:well documented
342:
340:
326:VivianDarkbloom
299:
297:
278:
275:
272:
269:
253:VivianDarkbloom
206:
160:actually famous
132:
85:
69:
66:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
407:
405:
396:
395:
379:
378:
357:
356:
355:
354:
353:
310:
285:
265:Andrew Lenahan
258:
243:
223:
199:
170:
146:β for example
126:
119:
118:
65:
60:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
406:
394:
392:
387:
381:
380:
377:
374:
370:
365:
361:
358:
352:
349:
347:
346:
336:
332:
331:
330:
327:
323:
322:
321:
318:
314:
311:
309:
306:
304:
303:
293:
289:
286:
284:
281:
266:
262:
259:
257:
254:
250:
247:
244:
242:
239:
238:B. Wolterding
235:
231:
227:
224:
222:
219:
214:
209:
207:Pharaoh Hound
203:
200:
198:
195:
192:his owners.--
190:
186:
182:
178:
174:
171:
169:
166:
161:
157:
154:and er.. the
153:
149:
145:
141:
138:
137:
136:
135:
130:
125:
116:
110:
106:
102:
98:
93:
89:
84:
80:
76:
72:
68:
67:
64:
59:
58:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
385:
382:
359:
338:
312:
295:
287:
268:
260:
245:
225:
201:
194:Curtis Clark
172:
165:Thomjakobsen
159:
158:, these are
139:
120:
45:
43:
31:
28:
360:Strong keep
246:Strong Keep
217:(The Game)
175:. Serious
288:Weak keep
317:Eusebeus
124:Zetawoof
115:View log
373:W.marsh
343:Radecki
335:WP:AN/I
300:Radecki
88:protect
83:history
54:Bearian
313:Delete
261:Delete
226:Delete
212:(talk)
202:Delete
177:WP:COI
173:Delete
152:Nipper
148:Blondi
140:Delete
92:delete
228:. No
109:views
101:watch
97:links
16:<
369:WP:N
292:this
234:WP:N
105:logs
79:talk
75:edit
48:per
46:keep
276:bli
183:or
113:β (
341:AK
298:AK
279:nd
273:ar
270:St
267:-
150:,
107:|
103:|
99:|
95:|
90:|
86:|
81:|
77:|
131:)
129:ΞΆ
127:(
117:)
111:)
73:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.