Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gunni

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. Consensus is that the topic is not notable. I can only say that I hope this bit of fun becomes notable. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:20, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gunni

[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)

Source indicates that the Gunni legend consists of a one-man hoax. Unable to find additional RS coverage. –dlthewave ☎ 16:49, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:23, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. ^{cinco de}L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 17:35, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Extremely local attempt at a jackalope, no indication of wider coverage. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:39, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A search revealed no reliable sources discussing the entity. :bloodofox: (talk) 18:01, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Maybe a hoax. But the taxidermied example I saw at Marysville was excellent. Maybe the bushfires wiped out the population. HiLo48 (talk) 01:02, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure whether to be more appalled in this statement by the gullibility on display or by the apparent understanding of what constitutes "notability"... --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 07:11, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I can assure you there is no gullibility involved. Clearly a good hoax is notable. This was a bloody good hoax. HiLo48 (talk) 07:58, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was pretty good. Check out the Gunni "fact sheet" from Marysville tourism. You can see the fact sheet alongside the taxidermy on this flickr account. --tronvillain (talk) 12:12, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete it's not a notable cryptid. The specific art installation could be notable, but I don't see enough referencing for that, nor a good merge/redirect target ( Marysville Visitors' Information Centre is a redlink not mentioned elsewhere). power~enwiki (π, ν) 18:15, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - while it could have been the equivalent of one of the fearsome critters, there doesn't seem to be anything to support that kind of folklore, and the taxidermy hoax itself doesn't appear to have achieved notability, however good it was. --tronvillain (talk) 19:21, 4 July 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.