Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Old Time Farm Shepherd

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. Discounting the socking. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 12:41, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Old Time Farm Shepherd

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL also, please fix the category)

Fails GNG. The last three sources are potentially reliable, but are used to cite trivial information, such as a single dog used to hunt raccoons. Google search reveals nothing attributable. Cavalryman (talk) 09:59, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:03, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This breed appears to be promoted by friends of the "farm collie" promoting people. Google Books shows one book on their training by someone that writes on many subjects, calling into question their expertise on this subject. Fails GNG on the "multiple sources are generally expected" criterion. William Harristalk 10:38, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails GNG & V. The few sources cited are SPS, non-independent or unreliable sources. None of the long established, reputable breed registries recognize it as a true breed or have it listed in their FSS where records are kept and true breeds are established for V. This is not a case of independent RS being out there to find with further research. Typically, when a dog breed is referred to as “rare”, there’s a reason for it and that reason is usually because the breed never existed as a true breed. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 19:33, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Wikipedia is not for advertising or promotion. Cavalarious (talk) 01:53, 29 November 2019 (UTC) Blocked sock. ST47 (talk) 02:18, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- ~~To clarify, Cavalarious means that the article is written like an ad. Therefore, delete at ALL costs. Artillericious (talk) 01:54, 29 November 2019 (UTC)~~ Blocked sock. ST47 (talk) 02:18, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - ~~I fully agree. Delete. Infantry-ician (talk) 01:56, 29 November 2019 (UTC)~~ Blocked sock. ST47 (talk) 02:18, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.