Ourasi: I'm suprised it has existed for 20 years now.  If it is possible to make a better article about the horse, it would be better to Delete it and make it better .  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdullah raji ( talk • contribs ) 13:37, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3 ).   I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 February 26 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 13:55, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal and Horse racing .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 14:48, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep -- Per WP:NHORSERACING a horse is considered notable if it won a US Grade I/Group I graded stakes race or the equivalent level in their respective nations.  Horses, due to their relatively short careers, at least once .  This horse won the Prix d'Amérique four times.  The Prix d'Amerique is widely considered the most prestigious harness race in the world.  Furthermore, nom gives no valid reason for deletion.  In fact, they admit that the subject may be notable and cite only an essay in support of deletion.  The notability guideline obviously trumps the essay.  Central and Adams ( talk ) 15:57, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:39, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Personally, i'd say we keep it and rework it- add proper sources and use an enclycopedic vocabulary.  Maybe expand on it in the style of other pages on notable racehorses like Affirmed YoursTrulyKor ( talk ) 09:13, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Should probably just be remade, But I think it would be better for a draft to be made to replace the current article ( wp:Blow it up and start over ).  Abdullah raji ( talk ) 13:03, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] WP:TNT is an essay.  It's one editor's opinion.  It doesn't override an actual notability criterion.  Also I don't see what's so bad about the article.  It has the relevant facts.  Central and Adams ( talk ) 13:10, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] But no sources, i might try to add them Abdullah raji ( talk ) 13:55, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Ok, it seems the french variant of the page has plenty of sources, so we could use that.  https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ourasi YoursTrulyKor ( talk ) 13:05, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The issue seems to be a lack of sources, if anything else.  At least some sources should be found so that we could also expand the article YoursTrulyKor ( talk ) 13:03, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:26, 4 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  22:29, 11 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : French article has many RS; the horse appears to have had book published about it in 2000 by Homeric, which I can't bring up on any sort of website; the author only having one name ala Cher or Madonna, makes me question the reliability of the source...  Regardless, there are quite a few newspaper articles about this animal.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 02:27, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] These are probably the most RS that English editors would recognize by name, Le Parisien newspaper [48] and Le Monde [49] .  Oaktree b ( talk ) 02:29, 12 March 2024 (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.

Discussion outcome: keep