Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Working Red

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. RL0919 (talk) 14:18, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

American Working Red

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

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

American Working Red (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Completely fails GNG and V, zero RS. Cavalryman (talk) 11:20, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:31, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:31, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

• Delete, no evidence of notability – no verifiable hits on Gbooks, no hits at all on Gnews. Appears to be an invention of the American Preservation Dog Registry, a wholly non-notable organisation (no verifiable hits on Gbooks, no hits at all on Gnews). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:22, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
• Delete - there is no method to the madness of all these new registries and fictitious dog breeds popping up on the internet - the here today, gone tomorrow types - most of which are simply marketing and trying to get recognition for new dog types that long established, reputable breed registries refuse to recognize because they do not qualify as purebred. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 14:52, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
• Delete. Non-notable, not recognized by any reputable registry. oknazevad (talk) 18:31, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
• Delete - I concur with the editors above. William Harristalk 09:31, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
• Delete - For all the reasons above. Gareth Griffith-Jones (contribs) (talk) 12:04, 12 September 2019 (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.