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. Tone 19:25, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mitla (cryptid) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable purported species based on a single sighting. –dlthewave ☎ 13:40, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:37, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete "There are certainly species of the smaller animals which so far have not been recorded in the text-books – the "mitla," for example, a black mixture of dog and cat." That's literally all we've got. Who tf thought that's the basis for an article? Reywas92^Talk 20:07, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• 'Delete due to lack of notability, lack of reliable sources. :bloodofox: (talk) 22:15, 24 December 2019 (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.