Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Breed type (dog)

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 redirect to Breed type. Content can be merged from history as appropiate. Sandstein 18:38, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Breed type (dog)

[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)

Completely unnecessary FORK of Breed type which itself should be merged with Breed standard. Most of the sources are not reliable (eg English Cocker Spaniel Club of America) whilst those that are only mention the term in passing or are used to cite ancillary information. Cavalryman (talk) 01:19, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Breed type is sufficient to cover all domesticated animals. William Harristalk 03:33, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 05:05, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merge all/delete Don't see any reason why this concept needs a separate article just for dogs. Seems to have a lot of OR to be cut. Reywas92^Talk 08:09, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merge selectively to Breed standard. Mostly OR fork. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 23:06, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Breed standard (or Breed type which might be a better title for the 3, though less developed), as there is no need at current prose length for a separate dog-specific article. This dog specific article is actually better sourced and developed than Breed standard (which is mostly dog related, shorter, and lacking citations) and Breed type (stub). This is not to say this article doesn't contain OR as Eggishorn points out, just that the present Breed standard doesn't appear to be better in that regard.--Eostrix (talk) 07:52, 29 January 2020 (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.