Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trinity Alps giant salamander

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 20:53, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Trinity Alps giant salamander

[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. WP:BEFORE search failed to return any reliable sources.

Current sourcing is also unreliable:

Coleman and Fortean Times are fringe sources
California Herps appears to be a serious reptile guide, however the "Trinity Alps giant salamander" entry is supported only by unreliable Cryptid Compendiums along with a circular Wikipedia reference. –dlthewave ☎ 13:01, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:03, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:SPECIESOUTCOMES as it hasn't been described or documented. Kingofaces43 (talk) 15:32, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
CommentMyers, George S. (8 June 1951). "Asiatic Giant Salamander Caught in the Sacramento River, and an Exotic Skink near San Francisco". Copeia. 2: 179–180. and unpublished "The Great Salamander Hunt" in the papers of Bernard R. Hubbard, though not mentioned in this biography.—eric 16:23, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete other references to Copeia are probably taken out of context. Not mentioned in the Hubbard's biography and not clear he was actually looking for this, but i like that quote from him.—eric 16:55, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not received any main stream coverage.Slatersteven (talk) 15:08, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not even side stream coverage. Per the reasoning of KofA and eric; doesn't appear to be a described species or meet GNG. – Levivich 22:16, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per lack of RS coverage. :bloodofox: (talk) 02:34, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails WP:FRINGE specifically and basic verification generally. Either made up in a day or a hoax. We do not publish what is essentially original research. Bearian (talk) 16:21, 18 December 2019 (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.