Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maiden Rock bantam

:{{la|Maiden Rock bantam}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Maiden Rock bantam}})

While established breeds of animals are inherently notable, this is not an established breed that can be verified through any reliable, published sources. The only two sources cited are to a forum for backyard chicken keepers and a breeder website.

Since there are hundreds of thousands of potential combinations of breeds, Wikipedia does not generally and should not contain articles about newly-created breeds unless there are enough reliable sources to provide verification. This is a similar situation to the many Poodle hybrids, most of which do not have articles for good reason.

I looked for sources in books or newspapers about this cross, and did not see any. Steven Walling • talk 21:41, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

• Delete. This may become an established cross, like the Holland Lop rabbit, but there's no proof that it will be, and un-established crosses don't belong here. Nyttend (talk) 23:19, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organisms-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:55, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

• Delete. This breed is not established, or notable. Google search provides no mention of these breed anywhere besides a poultry discussion forum, and no poultry standards accept it. Certain mentions even imply that this breed is only kept by its creator and no-one else. Anjwalker ^Talk 01:12, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

This breed is kept by three breeders and will soon be offered for sale to the general public. Unlike poodle hybrids or "labradoodles", this breed in homozygous state does breed true. In post number 76 of [http://www.backyardchickens.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=446769&p=8| this thread] one can see that this breed is indeed kept and bred by more than one breeder. I myself also keep this breed, as does another gentleman in Minnesota. Thank you for your understanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryan Zierke (talk • contribs) 02:20, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

:I'm sorry, but the metric for what is included in Wikipedia is not that X breeders keep the animal, but that reliable, independent sources have written about it. If there is no published secondary source material about a subject with which to verify facts, Wikipedia cannot have an article about something. As an encyclopedia, we can't rely on primary sources or verbal accounts of something. We need secondary sources. Steven Walling • talk 19:24, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

: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.