Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tiger kidnapping

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 keep. Spartaz ^Humbug! 18:04, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tiger kidnapping

Contested prod, so listing at AfD. This is simply a dictionary definition with dubious notability. Mikeblas (talk) 18:40, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to the two sources cited on the talk page in 2006, read these:
- "Tiger kidnapping — It's a jungle out there". Post Magazine. 2006-11-09.
- Unie van Zelfstandige Ondernemers (2005-06-21). "UNIZO over beveiligingsvoorstellen minister Dewael voor juwelier". Politics.be (in Dutch).
- David Lister and Sean O'Neill (2005-02-05). "IRA plc turns from terror into biggest crime gang in Europe". The Times. Times Newspapers Ltd.
Uncle G (talk) 19:11, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I think you're confusing verifiability with notability. -- Mikeblas (talk) 03:46, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - notability established the usual way. While certainly a stub, it's not a dicdef by any streach of the imagination. Much potential for expansion. Wily D 20:08, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I was able to cull five sources in about five seconds by searching Google, likely far less time than it took to set up this AfD. I provided the links at the article's talk page so it could be improved. Clearly notable.--otherlleft (talk) 21:22, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 19:50, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 18:49, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Transwiki to wiktionary, it's a dictdef currently. 76.66.201.13 (talk) 06:56, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No, it's a stub. We don't delete stubs that have potential for expansion. We expand them ourselves, or leave them to be expanded by other people, collaboratively. We only delete stubs if they have zero potential for expansion, and zero potential to be broadened into larger topics (by renaming and refactoring them) or merged into broader topics. Since you have not addressed even the three sources cited above, let alone what other sources might exist, you have not addressed the issue of whether this expansion is possible, and have given the closing administrator no valid rationale, thoroughly grounded in our Wikipedia:Deletion policy, to hang xyr hat on. Uncle G (talk) 16:01, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to kidnapping. Its pretty clear this is a term primarily used in the UK, and if we were to expand this we'd have endless edit wars on whether to mention kidnappings from other countries that don't use the term. On the other hand, it would work very well as a paragraph within the "kidnapping" article, which lacks a discussion on methods and countermeasures. And bonus points for using Control Risks as a source. Squidfryerchef (talk) 05:37, 18 November 2008 (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.