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 redirect to Poodle hybrid WjBscribe 05:16, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

After the failure of my earlier AFD attempt, here's another try at deleting some articles on dog crossbreeds that have nearly empty articles. All of the articles in this group were created en masse in what appears to be an attempt to create identical stubs for all the names listed at Poodle hybrid. Rationale for deletion remains similar to last time:

• These "breeds" aren't recognized by any registries of note.
• The articles fail to describe any features which are unique to the crossbreed, or - in fact - anything beyond its composition.
• The articles fail to source information to reliable sources. Each articles cites a boilerplate page on dogbreedinfo.com and the AKC definition of a mixed breed.

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yorkiepoo for a precedent on one of these articles - the issues raised there apply to all of these articles, as well as a number of others which I'll be nominating separately in the future.

Zetawoof^(ζ) 21:26, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect all to Poodle hybrid. All these really say is "A $mix_name is a cross between a Poodle and a $breed_name". (They have photos too, but the photos all violate the first Fair Use criterion and will have to be deleted regardless of the outcome of this AFD.) It's unhelpful to readers to click on a name in the list at Poodle hybrid and find no information that isn't already on the list. Better to redirect these and remove the wikilinks to them, until and unless there is something more to say. —Celithemis 23:30, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect all to Poodle hybrid, per Celithemis. Ideally what should happen is that this should start as a list in the Poodle hybrid article, possibly expanding to sections as more information from reliable sources is added to the article. If and only if a section on a cross gets big enough that it overruns the list should it be spun off to its own article. —C.Fred (talk) 02:35, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all, there is no information that needs to be merged, and we don't need article names for all these niche designer hybrids. If one becomes a notable breakout breed, fine, but keep WP:CRYSTAL in mind. That said, I don't strenuously object to redirects. --Dhartung | Talk 03:46, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect all. I don't support delete, as I think these are reaasonable search terms. Someguy1221 08:10, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect all to poodle hybrid. All are non-notable and shouldn't have their own articles. --Pharaoh Hound (talk) (The Game) 12:11, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Redir all. There's a 'Ling-Ling's head' joke in here somewhere... (for those who've seen the prank flyer...) ThuranX 04:49, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all, per Dhartung. Boricuaeddie^{Talk • Contribs • Spread the love!} 01:53, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Not even the parent article is properly sourced. Sentences such as "Poodle hybrids have become very popular as pets" could be easily challenged, since the author of the article does not provide statistics or surveys to prove it. Boricuaeddie^{Talk • Contribs • Spread the love!} 02:12, 1 May 2007 (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.