Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sheep Are Mammals Too Association

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 of the debate was delete. Mailer Diablo 00:54, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sheep Are Mammals Too Association[edit]

Notability has yet to be established. —WAvegetarian^TALK_CONTRIBS^EMAIL 22:38, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the talk page before voting or commenting. —WAvegetarian^TALK_CONTRIBS^EMAIL 22:53, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nonsense. Sheep are already classified as mammals. Is this a joke? Monkeyman 22:45, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't nonsense. It actually happened. And yes, it was a joke at the time. —WAvegetarian^TALK_CONTRIBS^EMAIL 22:53, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get it. You put it on AfD and then argue in favor of it? Is this part of the "absurd acts [...] and Performance Art" mentioned in the article? :/ I maintain my vote as originally submitted.

Monkeyman 23:05, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't ask you to change your vote, just your reasoning. I'm not arguing in favor of it; don't twist my words. I'm merely saying that it is not nonsense. It actually happened. It is, however, a non-notable stunt. As this isn't a straw poll and Wikipedia:Voting is evil, the reasoning matters more than the bolded summary. Please refer to the talk page for further explanation of its credibility. I think it should be deleted, but care about the reasoning. You might find my changing speedy tags to the appropriate reasoning pointless as well, but it is important that things be done right. —WAvegetarian^TALK_CONTRIBS^EMAIL 01:35, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I'm willing to accept that it's true, but that doesn't mean it's notable. --Aaron 23:45, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm too old to believe in SAMTA. Guy 23:51, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non-notable. Google gives "about 6" results. Hbackman 01:54, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit confused about the use of the Google test, especially in cases of a group such as this whose activities slightly predate widespread internet use. Is that a good measure? On the subject of whether SHAMTA is a joke, or prank. Yes, I believe the group was manipulating the local media, but I haven't read anything in print to that effect. What is the Wikipedia policy on that? Can I put a Category Prankster tag without documentation? I certainly think there are commonalities with Rhinoceros Party of Canada, The Yes Men, Joey Skaggs and the Dihydrogen monoxide hoax. I will go to the Library tomorrow. Leviathanbus 05:29, 21 February 2006 (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.