Talk:Mancs (dog)

AfD

Does anybody know why this article is marked to be considered for deletion? -Maelnuneb 18:45, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

• probably someone being an idiot since it is on the front page. this entry looks fine to me EthR 18:52, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

• Agreed. The article is just fine. There's no reason to delete it at all. --Dgilman 19:00, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

• Tag removed. I can see no reason for it - its a nice little article. The tag was placed by a user on their first edit. As no reason was given for the tag, it was unsigned, and the article is on the front page today, I see it as just mischief. Istvan 19:22, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

• It's a bad faith nomination. I closed it as a Speedy keep. --Aaron 19:23, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks to everyone who voted to keep it! – Alensha  ^talk 19:34, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

• Uh, seriously... I'm sure Mancs is a nice dog, but is he really notable and worthy of an article? Maybe this article should be in the Hungarian version of Wikipedia. The one source in the article is in Hungarian, and there is no mention of this dog. Wiki does not even have an article on the "Spider Special Rescue Team" Martylunsford 21:57, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

• I agree with martylunsford. A google search returns nothing on the dog other than the article in Wikipedia. Wikipedia articles are supposed to be sourced. 64.134.101.41 22:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

• It looks like it was nominated for deletion, and then made a "speedy keep" all within an hour. There was no real discussion over the article, just a couple of people that said it "looks fine" or "it's a nice little article". That doesn't necessarily qualify the article to be on Wikipedia. The article clearly doesn't meet the "No Original Research Policy", since it is unsourced. I also did a Google search and found nothing. This article is currently nothing more than unsourced trivia. Why is this dog notable? Lots of dogs have saved lots of people. I don't necessarily think the article should be deleted, but it definitely needs work. It was a mistake to do the "speedy keep" thing. Sam1174 00:04, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Just becouse you didn't found this dog by searching for "Mancs" on google on the first page, doesn't mean anything.

• the name is just 5 characters long, so you can find a lot of other meanings
• Mancs is a common name for dogs, so search for the full name instead.

• Again I urge a speedy keep -

• The dog is up on google (you have to dig - "Mancs" is also UK abbrev for Manchester)
• Another source can be found here [1]
• Not worthy of an article? Is saving human life around the world not quite enough merit?
• The 2nd AfD is ONCE AGAIN put up by an SPA.

...and it *is* a nice little article. A keeper. Istvan 04:13, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep, but improve." It is probably a worthy entry, but it needs improvement. It definitely needs sources (in English). I also disagree about the speedy keep. The article has issues that should have been addressed prior to removing it's nomination for deletion.

• Most of the information in the article isn't really interesting to the general public. For example the name of the owner and the particular missions the dog has participated in. The only interesting thing is that a rescue dog has had a statue erected of him/her. This is a nice little piece of information that definitely should be on wikipedia, but it fits better in a trivia section in the article about rescue dogs. That is a place where it is likely to be read by more interested people.

• If we have whole articles about dogs whose only claim to fame is that their owners are famous people (like Thong Daeng, the Thai king's dog), then why couldn't a famous dog's owner be mentioned in the article? :) – Alensha  ^talk 13:12, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Mancs has all the merit it needs and requires no apologies or justifications. What is truly puzzling is how it gets put up for AfD twice, both times by a Single-Purpose-Acount, deletion supported by (almost) no signed registered users - seriously, I think its probably one single person causing mischief for everyone else. Istvan 14:04, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Here's the Deal... I nominated it for deletion the second time. I don't necessarily think the article should be deleted, but it definitely did not meet Wiki standards when I read it on the main page. I saw that it had been nominated for deletion and then "speedy kept" all within an hour, without any legitimate discussion. That's simply not right. The article was UNSOURCED! It was a stub, and a poor stub at that. I've never nominated an article for deletion before, but I had one of my articles nominated, and I didn't like it. In hindsight, however, my article didn't meet the standards. I fixed it (with the help of some other people), and now the article is a good article. I didn't nominate this article because I wanted it to be deleted, I nominated it because I wanted it to be improved. Without the attention that it got by being nominated for deletion, it wouldn't have gotten the attention that it needed to be improved. Martylunsford 02:10, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Mancs was nominated for deletion the second time by user:Sam1174 on that account's first edit. You state above that you in fact made the nomination. Why then not in your own name? Why hide your identity? If you wanted Mancs to be improved and not deleted, then why not edit it or simply put some such request on the talk page? It got speedy keep because others thought it met standards (sometimes "short" equals "concise" and not "stub" and it WAS sourced). Nobody here put any of your stuff up for AfD (that I know of), so why the provocation? Istvan 04:07, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

What difference does it make? I have several Wikipedia IDs. I made my point in my comments above. I've never vandalized a page. I'm just trying to make Wiki better. You have to admit, the article is better now that attention has been drawn to it.

And it was a stub. A single link to an article in HUNGARIAN in an English article is not a source.

We can all drop it now and move on. The article will remain.Sam1174 03:50, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

"references in foreign languages are fin[e] when tnere are none in English" -- User:Circeus, Administrator [2] -- I was told this in a very similar situation, when I wanted an article of mine to appear in DYK (pure coincidence, but that article was about the square where Mancs's statue stands :)) Because of this I thought it's no problem that the references are in Hungarian. Also, articles are frequently translated from other Wikipedias – in Swedish WP, for example, I've often seen other language Wikipedias listed and accepted as sources. (If you're mainly active in EnWiki, then you are possibly not aware of this, because as the largest WP, EnWiki is the primary source when translating. But we smaller wikis frequently check each other, like "you don't know whether the birth date of this Slovak poet or Estonian politician is correct? go and check the Slovak/Estonian WP", and so on.) So I thought the fact that the Mancs article of Hungarian Wikipedia is perfectly identifiable as being about the same subject, and that there no one opposed him having an article, is enough to verify his notability.

The Internet is not perfect and we can't expect to find a website about everything in all languages in the world, maybe that will change in the future (and I think Wikipedia will play a very important part in it – if we allow it to.) Anyway, the article is much better now than it used to be. Thanks to everyone who cares about it. :) – Alensha  ^talk 15:54, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Current whereabouts?

Where is Mancs now? Is he still alive? This is not a bad page, but it could say more. Wyvern 19:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

He is alive, but already retired, living with his owner. I'll try to find more info. – Alensha  ^talk 19:34, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

He is dead by now. :( --V. Szabolcs 18:06, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Phonetics

Could someone with the ability to read International phonetic alphabet entries (or to pronounce "Mancs" in Hungarian, I suppose), add a more accessable phonetic transcription in addition to the IPA transcription? (I'm not saying remove the IPA transcription, but if we added another one, then people like me would know how to pronounce "Mancs"). Thanks, TheronJ 19:00, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't know much about IPA transciptions, but it's pronounced like "munch": :) – Alensha  ^talk 22:46, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Special talent

I read somwhere that his special talent is not only locating people trapped under earth but he is among the very few rescuedogs who can ditinguish between alive and already dead persons and able to report the difference. This is the reason why he was so valuable in İzmit several days after the earthquake - the rescue teams could concentrate to saving te alive ones and go later for the corpses. Unfortunately I can not find online reference for it, can somone help for expanding the article? - Serinde 06:14, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I found and added one, but it's in Hungarian only. – Alensha ^talk 23:42, 11 October 2006 (UTC)