Talk:Exploding snake

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

merge to Exploding animal, 14 March 2009, see discussion.
Keep, 29 October 2005, see discussion.

Awww...

Awww... I was hoping to write this article! :-) Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | W_S 14:21, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The beauty of the speed of Wikipedia and its ability to report the explosion of any animal. violet/riga (t) 08:52, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Um what kind of confirmation exists for this kind of event taking place? 207.99.90.253 12:29, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Split

Really, rather than exploded.... Rich Farmbrough 15:27, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I concur, this was not an expolsion, the snake just ripped open. 206.11.112.251 18:56, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree, it burst or split raher than exploded. A Max J 11:40, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merger

MERGE - This minor anecdote deserves "at best" a paragraph under the Python article. SirIsaacBrock 17:29, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree - it doesn't belong there, and is best left here. violet/riga (t) 20:21, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I also disagree. This is an article on its own. A Max J 11:38, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The snake did not explode the tail of the gator pierced from the inside the Python's skin, there was no explosion. This is a fabrication. SirIsaacBrock 01:50, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was reported (see the external links) as "exploding", and it fits with the exploding animals theme. violet/riga (t) 10:10, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Current Events?

I suppose that this could be current events (note third paragraph). Does anyone agree? A Max J 11:38, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

This article should be AfD's, Wikipedia is not a newspaper and this was a one-time, non-notable event. Vpoko 19:23, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree; although it was a one-time event (at least as of this writing), it continues to be one of those internet memes that I think is worthwhile to have the basic facts about on Wikipedia. For example, the news article in this Boing Boing post of September 2006 refers to the incident.

That said, this article goes beyond the basic facts, and could possibly use a trim (e.g. the information about the 'python epidemic').--BlackAndy 00:34, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Still Worth Keeping?

It's been two and a half years now, the incident doesn't appear to have been repeated, and the internet meme seems to have died down a lot. Does this really need its own article anymore?Ricree101 (talk) 21:55, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]