Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Burzese family goats

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 userfy. Userfy to User:Coolalldaway/Burzese family goats - if/when it has reliable sources, it can be moved to main space -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 16:14, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Burzese family goats

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

While this goat herd may have some local significance, it does not appear to satisfy the general notability guideline. I cannot find reliable third party sources to verify any of the information and/or the notability of the subject. Nick—^Contact/_Contribs 05:43, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I was hoping to find sources, but even a generic Google web search for the words Burzese and goat does not turn up anything about these goats. Kitfoxxe (talk) 05:56, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As the author of the page, I can assure you that the goats are real. Unfortunately, this article was not compiled based on online references, but rather, word of mouth passed down through generations of our family. Because our small petting farm does not have a website, we are unable to provide any external links that verify these claims other than factual verification of the existence of our pizza store and the breed of goat found. We are attempting to have a local newspaper do a story on the herd, but until then, we cannot provide definitive electronic supporting evidence. I hope that you will withhold deleting the article until we can find a way to verify its factual basis. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coolalldaway (talk • contribs) 06:03, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I liked the article, but WP can't have an article on something until after it is documented in published sources. I would like to visit the goats if I am in that part of the country. Kitfoxxe (talk) 01:50, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Wikimedia foundations mission statement, "The mission of the Wikimedia Foundation is to empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally." I always thought Wikipedia was ultimately working toward a goal of free information flow, combining as many sources as possible to create a unique source of educational knowledge. That's why I chose to write about my family's goat herd on here - it seemed like the perfect forum to discuss an interesting part of American history that many people may not have been exposed to. I don't understand how a lack of third party sources is that big of an issue, given that the article is clearly not a vanity article, and would make no sense written as a joke. It is not malicious or opinionated - it is merely an account of a previously undocumented historical phenomenon. 68.73.200.214 (talk) 14:51, 14 March 2010 (UTC)coolalldaway[reply]

But your personal account of your family's history (and goats) has not been verified by a reliable source. We insist on sourcing to avoid the possibility of false information being put into the encyclopedia. That's not to say I think you're lying, but without an insistence on sourcing, Wikipedia could no longer call itself a reference work: it would be a blog.

Without sourcing, your article will be deleted. That's a cold hard reality of Wikipedia.--Father Goose (talk) 20:17, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unsourced, unverifiable and thus probably not notable. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 16:53, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy - Userspace is the appropriate place for family stories.Smallman12q (talk) 01:36, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy - until properly referenced and sourced and some notabililty asserted. The article creator is warned of COI, and reminded that Wikipedia ios neither a forum nor a substitute for a family website that is easy enough to create for free these days.--Kudpung (talk) 05:47, 17 March 2010 (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.