Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of historical animals

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 delete. --Core desat 07:28, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of historical animals[edit]

Duplicates lists already included in Category:Lists of historical animals. Any additional articles will be added to the lists themselves, rather than this list, so there is little point having both a category and a list for these. Masaruemoto 01:07, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Redefines listcruft. Mystache 02:07, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, and maybe redirect, but probably not since it's a cross namespace redirect. The article serves no purpose. YechielMan 02:34, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a copycat and listcruft. Sr13 (T|C) ^ER 06:49, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletions. -- Pax:Vobiscum 20:22, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per YechielMan, plus Commons redirects pages to cats. - Patricknoddy^{TALK (reply here)}^|^HISTORY 20:43, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. DaveApter 16:25, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Categories are much more successful than lists. Peterkingiron 22:03, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, completely meaningless list. RFerreira 06:09, 5 May 2007 (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.