Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cabbit

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 keep. Now that the article has been debullshitted. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:36, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cabbit

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

The page makes fantastic claims about the existence of cat-rabbit hybrids behind the Canadian parliament without citing any sources, and also propagates other hoaxes. It is poorly referenced, with several citations not providing enough information to actually locate the source of the citation. It seems to mix up the fictional portrayal (which is again, mostly unreferenced) of cabbits with their actual existence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piyush Sriva (talk • contribs)

Speedy delete>>. Hoax. One of the cites (previously) titled 'why cats breed with rabbits' actually links to an aticle called 'why cats can't breed with rabbits' - I changed it. TheLongTone (talk) 18:03, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What are the notability guidelines for cryptozoology?TheLongTone (talk) 00:12, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In particular, the article provides no evidence of verifiability, seems to violate the "no original research" policy, and also seems to lack notability. Piyush (talk) 18:05, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:14, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:14, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organisms-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:15, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I dont think this can be called a Hoax as there are references to books in the article. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 18:33, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Many of the references themselves seem to be hoaxes, referring only to author names and titles. And the article makes its most fantastic claims (such as the claim that cats and rabbits can interbreed, which has a whole section devoted to it) without citing any sources. A majority of the article does read like a hoax. Piyush (talk) 19:04, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Redirect to Ryo-Ohki, is the term "Cabbit" used in the series to describe the character? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 18:39, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete. Hoax. The references directly contradict the article. And the book references are citing the physical features of the Manx. I also doubt that the term is used in the series Tenchi Muyo! to refer to Ryo-Ohki as the history of the character's article leaves the impression that its an informal name for the species. ~Cheers, Ten Ton Parasol 19:06, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Based on the protection logs, this article was protected twice due to a long-standing campaign to insert false information claiming that cabbits are real creatures and live behind the Canadian parliament building. The most recent protection expired earlier this month, and it seems that the campaign of false information has continued since then. I'm going to revert the false information and request permanent semi-protection for the article. The false claims that cabbits exist and live behind the Canadian parliament building should not be taken into consideration when deciding whether to keep or delete the article. Calathan (talk) 19:18, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- That explains a lot. Although the article still needs improvement in terms of addition of citations, I think it is clear now that minus the vandalism, it is most probably not a hoax. I am still not sure about notability and original research though. Piyush (talk) 19:29, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment In fact, I'd recommend that the part of the article left after its heroic salvage by Calathan could perhaps best fit as a section in the article on Manx cats. Piyush (talk) 19:44, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still not sure about the notability of the article. But I'm not sure if the info would be useful for the Manx cats article... ~Cheers, Ten Ton Parasol 19:54, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The article still seems to be under a "vandalism attack". I just undid an edit which had unilaterally removed the deletion notice and also included the fallacious bits that were removed earlier by Calathan. Piyush (talk) 06:22, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The hoax is real, but the information being inserted into the article is clearly fake. I removed the Care of Cats had no reference to the Cabbit in it, but I could be wrong with a google check, until I get the 1959 copy in my hands, but information being inserted is being used to portray a myth as fact. While not exactly a major myth, cabbits have been popping up from time to time in various mediums including pot shots on similar ones being referenced to in the Simpsons. While Tenchi Muyo is the main show which featured a cabbit, the cabbit myth has been around since the 1930s. Also a personal webpage is actually better then the Wiki, but has at least one source from a paper about it and plenty of details. [1] The Cabbit myth is an old one, but as a hoax or myth it is a notable hoax and not one which should be labeled otherwise. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 06:39, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if it appears in pop culture and what-not as often as you say, I'll vote Keep. ~Cheers, Ten Ton Parasol 19:00, 31 May 2012 (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.