Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hannibal (swan)

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. Sandstein 09:17, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hannibal (swan)[edit]

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

The contemporaneous news coverage isn't enough to meet GNG. "Sources" should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability., and I would consider these all to be primary sources. power~enwiki (π, ν) 01:25, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep There is coverage in reliable sources here, and how could they possibly be "primary", it's a swan?★Trekker (talk) 01:30, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. WeAreAllHere _talk 02:39, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal -related deletion discussions. WeAreAllHere _talk 02:39, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete lots of common interest stories from only two points in time. SportingFlyer talk 06:14, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, news about a bad swan. Szzuk (talk) 16:35, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. utterly trivial. NOTNEWS. DGG ( talk ) 22:04, 20 April 2018 (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.