Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Octopus (politics)

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2008 September 22.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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. MBisanz ^talk 01:16, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Octopus (politics)

Unnotable conspiracy from Danny Casolaro. Lacking sources since January 2007. We66er (talk) 20:46, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Completely lacking in any serious encyclopedic value. Ecoleetage (talk) 13:48, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no refs or sources.(69.231.39.97 (talk) 19:58, 17 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:31, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I can't remember, but wasn't there a famous political cartoon depicting a certain government as an octopus? I want to vote a redirect to that cartoonist, but since the details escape me, I'm voting Delete for now. JuJube (talk) 08:11, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete existing article. That was Thomas Nast's carton of William M. Tweed, the 19th century Tammany boss of NYC. It has since been used in many other contexts, including Richard Nixon. It was the title of a 1901 book byFrank Norris, where it stands for the Southern Pacific Railroad. None of these need a link here, for this particular use is not notable. We need an article on Cultural references to octopus. Or a completely new article under the present title, where I suppose this might possibly get a mention, just for completeness. DGG (talk) 17:08, 20 September 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.