Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Capture of painted turtles

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 speedy keep. SK1 - nominator does not propose deletion The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:42, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Capture of painted turtles[edit]

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

most of the content is in the main article. I am the main author. Page is never going to go anywhere. Was just me trying to save a few words for posterity when I had to slim a section down in the main article. Thing is also very low view. Don't even consider it a deletion. more like a merge (content is in main article). TCO (talk) 23:25, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment So why not a {{merge to}}? What arises in a merge situation is the main article painted turtle is already large and according to WP:SIZERULE a split is required. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 00:33, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep per SK #1 – the nomination suggests a merge, and doesn't seem to have an adequate rationale for deletion per WP:DEL-REASON. Per WP:SIZERULE, this is a reasonable split from the main Painted turtle article. Also, upon review, most of the information in this article does not appear to be in the main article. Rather, the main article seems to summarize information in this Capture of painted turtles article. Lastly, this article is well-sourced. Northamerica1000^(talk) 01:16, 18 July 2012 (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.