###Instruction: Multi-class classification, answer with one of the labels:['no_consensus', 'delete', 'keep', 'comment', 'merge', 'redirect'] : ###Input:  Q94171870: anthropomorphic pigeon (Q94171870) : pigeon with human-like traits : ( delete | history | links | entity usage | logs | discussion ) Not notable. The Squirrel Conspiracy ( talk ) 13:24, 22 July 2024 (UTC) On hold This item is linked from 4 others. -- DeltaBot ( talk ) 13:31, 22 July 2024 (UTC) Keep . How can a type of fictional character not be notable? If it wasn't used at all then you might have an argument, but did you even bother checking? I do think the image is pointless decoration. — Xezbeth ( talk ) 19:03, 23 July 2024 (UTC) Keep This has recently been closed as keep due to structural need, see https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions/Archive/2024/05/13#Q94171870 Piecesofuk ( talk ) 09:11, 24 July 2024 (UTC) This seems like it should be handled in a more general fashion. Having to create a separate "anthropomorphic X" entity for every species which has been represented as a humanoid character in media (and there's a lot of those!) seems like it could get out of hand pretty quickly. Omphalographer ( talk ) 00:44, 26 July 2024 (UTC) Yeah it's a tricky question. People should be using Property:P10241 instead in my opinion. StarTrekker ( talk ) 11:55, 22 August 2024 (UTC) This seems like it should be handled in a more general fashion. Having to create a separate "anthropomorphic X" entity for every species which has been represented as a humanoid character in media (and there's a lot of those!) seems like it could get out of hand pretty quickly. Omphalographer ( talk ) 00:44, 26 July 2024 (UTC) Yeah it's a tricky question. People should be using Property:P10241 instead in my opinion. StarTrekker ( talk ) 11:55, 22 August 2024 (UTC) This seems like it should be handled in a more general fashion. Having to create a separate "anthropomorphic X" entity for every species which has been represented as a humanoid character in media (and there's a lot of those!) seems like it could get out of hand pretty quickly. Omphalographer ( talk ) 00:44, 26 July 2024 (UTC) Yeah it's a tricky question. People should be using Property:P10241 instead in my opinion. StarTrekker ( talk ) 11:55, 22 August 2024 (UTC)