Deletion of Oriental Yeti

Comment: It is a thing and we keep articles which meet out GNG. In regard to the nominator's rationale about continued coverage- notability is not temporary per  https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/apr/06/mystery-of-oriental-yeti The Guardian, https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-News/2010/0406/Oriental-Yeti-found-in-China-is-no-Yeti Christian Science Monitor, https://www.huffpost.com/entry/oriental-yeti-that-looks_n_526747 Huff post, https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/oriental-yeti-that-looks-like-a-bear-without-fur-shipped-for-tests-tcqprkhxz7x The Sunday Times, and https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/oriental-yeti-that-looks-like-a-bear-without-fur-shipped-for-tests-tcqprkhxz7x New Indian Express
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NTEMP)

Comment: WP:NTEMP is a bit of a red herring. Yes, notability is not temporary, but that only applies if the subject ''was once notable''. The point the nominator was making is that this is effectively just a single news event with no lasting coverage or impact, and thus was ''never'' notable, making NTEMP irrelevant. I agree with them - this article might as well be 'alleged discovery of oriental yeti' and the criteria that most obviously apply are . This clearly misses categories 1 and 2 and most neatly falls into category 4: "shock news", "water cooler story" or viral phenomenon lacking lasting value despite briefly receiving substantial coverage in reliable sources
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:EVENTCRIT)