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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:09, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Labrador Husky[edit]

Labrador Husky (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Fails GNG, likely a little WP:TOOSOON. None of the cited sources are RS, a search of Google reveals nothing attributable. Cavalryman (talk) 10:18, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:42, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. None of the cited sources are reliable. The only reliable source that I could find was "Labrador Huskies in the Falkland Islands Dependencies and Antarctica", Dickinson 2015, who discusses use of the huskies from Labrador and refers to them as the Labrador husky. Therefore fails GNG. William Harristalk 11:51, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Labrador. A perfectly plausible search term. —Мандичка^YO 😜 12:06, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Why would you redirect a husky to a region of Canada? William Harristalk 11:12, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  I agree with William Harris, redirecting this article to Labrador (a geographic and cultural region within the Canadian province of Newfoundland and Labrador) is inappropriate. Cavalryman (talk) 04:33, 18 February 2020 (UTC).[reply]

• Keep. The sources are there, and I've seen no explanation as to why they are unreliable. There is a complaint in Talk that they are not peer reviewed, which makes little sense because most cites are not. Additional complaints about the article from the same person claim that the breed is not established because it is similar to other breeds in appearance and whole genome sequencing hasn't been provided. This is again odd as this is the case for the vast majority of articles here on various dog breeds. Finally the person complains about grammatical errors present in the article (which they apparently didn't fix) and presents some uncited personal research to advocate for removal. I think that the case to remove is very poorly established. Philip72 (talk) 20:40, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Hello Philip72 (talk), can I suggest you familiarise yourself with WP:RS; self published websites, websites comprised of user generated content and websites that write a disclaimer specifically stating they do not warrant the accuracy of any information they have published do not fall within the scope of acceptable sources for Wikipedia. Kind regards, Cavalryman (talk) 04:28, 18 February 2020 (UTC).[reply]

• Delete per WP:SIGCOV. The AKC website does not even mention them in the linked page. The other sources appear to be self-published. Peer-review papers are not required for "pop-culture" types of articles; I'm just looking for textbooks, reputable website, and news articles at a minimum. Todays Doggy magazine is not a reliable source. I found not a single newspaper article about this breed, and many books talk about mixed breed puppies. Bearian (talk) 17:32, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:GNG, WP:TOOSOON, WP:NFT, WP:NOT#INDISCRIMINATE, etc. This is utterly unverifiable, a promotion piece (which appears to have cribbed liberally from other husky-related material on WP) for an effort to establish a breed that is not recognized by a single international or national kennel club/breed registry, and which has no coverage anywhere at all (not even tertiary sources like breed encyclopedias) beyond Web forums and self-published blogs by people with no real-world reputability as subject-matter experts (other than an alleged mention at WebMD, but that constitutes WP:UGC material anyway, I think). Do not redirect to Labrador, since an alleged dog breed has nothing to with a region of Canada in the abstract. Do not redirect to and summarize at Husky unless at least a couple of independent and actually secondary and reliable sources can confirm this isn't either just made up or just some "backyard breeder" experiment. WP has absolutely no reason to cover every single little population of dogs that someone made up a name for. Most attempts at breed establishment fail.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  05:46, 23 February 2020 (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.