Talk:Exploding animal
Wow this is getting funny JuntungWu 07:29, 21 May 2005 (UTC)
Delete not true there is no top 20 google results
Should the article exist?
The template and category are funny, but as an article, it reflects a term best known inside Wikipedia itself- see 211 Google hits minus Wikipedia. CanadianCaesar 05:20, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
Some of it is interesting, but the category is full of enthusiastically written but un-encyclopedic stories. For example, "Exploding snake" is just the regurgitation of a single news-wire story. —Michael Z. 2005-12-20 05:53 Z
- I've no problem with the subarticles; exploding snake may not be tremendously notable, but for the purposes of building upon a weird and wacky project started with exploding whale, a BBC story is notable enough for me. It's just exploding animal, itself, that bothers me. Where's the sources? CanadianCaesar 06:00, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
- Never mind. User:JJay found a source so I rewrote it. CanadianCaesar The Republic Restored 20:43, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
Why does this article exist? We don't need an article on exploding animals that includes things like blowing up a whale with dynamite. We could include every animal if the only requirement is that is will blow up if near exploding dynamite. If there were animals capable of naturally exploding that did so on a fairly regular basis, that would be different but as it stands now this article doesn't really serve a purpose and ins't terribly encyclopedic. - Kuzain 08:19, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Well i think it should exist... but mabye somebody should explain why blowing oneself up is a form of self defense :D (the april 2005 toads blowing up..hehe)DakaSha April 6th 2006