Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frederik the Great

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. ^Complex/_Rational 16:47, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Frederik the Great

[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)

Not notable. Fails WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage and no sustained coverage. The subject is not known for any performance awards or even breeding awards. His unofficial claim to fame is "lots of hair" and an owner with a marketing push in 2016 who tried to make him an internet sensation. But he's just a one-trick pony. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 16:46, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:59, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Netherlands and Arkansas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:15, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTFB and WP:MILL. He's a horse with 5,000 followers on a Facebook page that hasn't been updated in four years. I had over 4,000 followers on my Twitter page before I deleted it. Where did our notability guidelines ever in 24 years state that having a few thousand followers was a golden ticket to automatic notability? Ping me if you find it. In the meantime, a story about a handsome horse is the kind of feature story that talk shows love to fill up air time without annoying the viewers or the advertisers, but it's not encyclopedic. Bearian (talk) 03:01, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE and WP:NOTDIR. The article is short and provides littles context. The topic has briefly been hyped in the media, apparently from a commercial perspective. gidonb (talk) 16:53, 11 March 2025 (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.