Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/English Shepherd

English Shepherd

[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)

Fails GNG, all of the verifiable cited sources are not RS. A search of Google reveals nothing attributable, only the usual self published owners guides etc. Cavalryman (talk) 22:31, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn by nominator as two reliable sources have been presented by Thjarkur. Cavalryman (talk) 04:45, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is mentioned in these two non-self-published sources: [1][2], but it has surprisingly few mentions in other sources. – Thjarkur (talk) 23:01, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thjarkur, thank you for finding those two, I did not see them amongst the first ten pages of Google books I trawled through, due to them I have withdrawn the nomination. Kind regards, Cavalryman (talk) 04:45, 18 February 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:11, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I don't see any real argument here for delete. I am sure the article can be source and I don't see how a real WP:BEFORE has been done at all. I mean, I found this source straight away, and there are plenty of sources on the internet to use. This AfD is a joke and a waste of people's time. Govvy (talk) 10:44, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A single webpage does not notability make. Cavalryman (talk) 04:45, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Snow keep. I have no idea why this was nominated. This is just as notable as any other dog breed. There are multiple clubs and organizations devoted to this breed. They were previously known as American farm shepherds in the USA.[3] —Мандичка^YO 😜 11:41, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - there are not a huge number of sources, but it seems to have enough to be notable. Bearian (talk) 16:39, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]