Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Broad-banded temple pit viper

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 keep. Closing per WP:SNOW, no need to spin this out any longer. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 13:38, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Broad-banded temple pit viper[edit]

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

No citations, very short description. Mr. Anon 515 23:07, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep "No citations, very short description." may have been true at the time of tagging, but those are things that can be fixed by editing, they aren't sufficient reason to delete. Article may be short now, but it was only ten minutes old when it was tagged for deletion. Oh and it now has a citation. I'm not convinced every species is notable, but I think it a fair bet that every extant species of snake is notable. Ϣere SpielChequers 00:08, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep neither of the reasons put forth by the nominator are valid reasons to delete. Per WP:SPECIESOUTCOMES, a species should usually pass AfD if it has a valid name and is given at least a blurb in a reputable source. Check and check (pdf). Deadbeef 03:38, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keepper Deadbeef. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 08:14, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep obviously passes WP:SPECIESOUTCOMES based upon the reference that Deadbeef has provided. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 10:45, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator attempted to rescind AfD and also provided the first reference. Recommend closing early based upon these diffs and !votes already cast, therefore WP:SNOW. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 10:50, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Yeah this nomination was a mistake. Unfortunately, bots prevented me from removing the deletion template. Mr. Anon 515 03:22, 31 December 2014 (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.