Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of giant squid specimens and sightings (21st century)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. WP:SNOW, overwhelming consensus that the nomination (later withdrawn) was completely without merit. postdlf (talk) 14:37, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List of giant squid specimens and sightings (21st century)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

List of giant squid specimens and sightings (21st century) (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)

Not an important article, only one contributor. 2simple (talk) 10:50, 7 May 2019 (UTC) — 2simple (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 12:48, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 12:48, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The number of contributors always starts at one and our best articles such as FA are mostly the work of one dedicated editor. So, this is not a valid reason to delete. Also, the topic passes WP:LISTN – see Hidden Animals, for example. Andrew D. (talk) 11:42, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Too specific. WP:DPAFD and WP:ARTN : "If the subject has not been covered outside of Wikipedia, no amount of improvements to the Wikipedia content will suddenly make the subject notable." 2simple (talk) 14:38, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    You... did see those couple of references (AKA evidence of coverage) that are lightly sprinkled throughout the article, right? --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 14:59, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    You have List of colossal squid specimens and sightings also too similar. One list is "colossal", the other is "giant". 2simple (talk) 15:30, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Different genera: Colossal squid, Giant squid. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 16:02, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Snow Keep I was not previously aware of this and its two sister articles (List of giant squid specimens and sightings, List of giant squid specimens and sightings (20th century)). These are damn impressive. They are pretty much what a list on Wikipedia is supposed to be like: a collection of material that would be really difficult to find as separate pieces, conforming to a strict inclusion criterion, impeccably referenced; it's an extraordinary resource that to my knowledge is unique on the internet. Give Mgiganteus1 a number of barnstars and encourage them to submit this as a review article to a journal (may I suggest the WikiJournal of Science, while we are here). - BTW, a minimal amount of due diligence would have revealed that they are not the "sole author", but that most of this material was split from the massive List of giant squid specimens and sightings, which has had many contributors. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 14:51, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Interesting article with much research. Giant squids are notable for the rarity in sighting of living specimens, so lists like this are what people look for on Wikipedia. --Nessie (talk) 14:57, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Ample coverage is given for these events. Dream Focus 15:52, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep No valid deletion rationale was advanced, and none is evident. XOR'easter (talk) 17:19, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment All it needs is clean up. Trillfendi (talk) 17:23, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The nominator's only surviving contributions are to this AfD nomination. No user page, no user talk page. Explanation? Eastmain (talk • contribs) 19:17, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Elmidae. —⁠烏⁠Γ (kaw) │ 19:34, 07 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as article creator. With regards to coverage outside of Wikipedia, see the following:
  1. Ellis, R. (1994). Giant Squid Sightings and Strandings. [pp. 379–384] In: Monsters of the Sea. Knopf, New York. xiii + 429 pp. ISBN 0-679-40639-5.
  2. Ellis, R. (1998). Authenticated Giant Squid Sightings and Strandings. [pp. 257–265] In: The Search for the Giant Squid. Lyons Press, New York. ix + 322 pp. ISBN 1-55821-689-8.
  3. Sweeney, M.J. & C.F.E. Roper (2001). Records of Architeuthis Specimens from Published Reports. National Museum of Natural History. 132 pp.
mgiganteus1 (talk) 20:43, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Passes LISTN per Andrew D., mgiganteus1 et al. Suggest nominating at WP:FLC. Daß Wölf 02:33, 8 May 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_giant_squid_specimens_and_sightings_(21st_century)&oldid=896136463"