Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of mammal species in Florida
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The result was Speedy keep by means of unanimous vote and withdrawn nom. Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 01:10, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- List of mammal species in Florida (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Unsure about this one, thinking it might be WP:LISTCRUFT Rackabello 22:55, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Withdraw and Speedy Close I said I wasn't sure about this one, looks like we have a consensus here that its definitely not listcruft. Sorry for listing and wasting everyone's time, I acted on my initial impressions, and sometimes that isn't a good idea :( Rackabello 00:43, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Well-sourced, comprehensive treatment. Focused and clearly defined criteria for listing limit the potential for listcruft status. Horologium t-c 23:07, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment At the risk of sounding like a cheerleader, the creator of this list already has three Featured Lists, and another which is likely to be promoted, currently at FL candidates. His list contributions are very strong. (Yes, I have worked with him closely on a couple articles, but not this or any of the featured lists.) Horologium t-c 23:53, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep Is listcruft the best you got? I'm no fan of lists myself but this one is both well sourced and with a clearly defined criteria for inclusion. As a good examle of how lists should be done speedy keep. MartinDK 23:22, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Aside from having 99 sources, I don't think it meets the criteria of WP:LISTCRUFT nor do I think it gets caught up in Indiscriminate Collection of Information. Useight 23:24, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong speedy keep Not at all listcruft. It's well sourced, discriminate, encyclopedic, comprehensive -- everything a Wikipedia list should be. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 23:31, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep No, it's definitely not WP:LISTCRUFT. --Crzycheetah 23:40, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Keep As per above. Lemonflashtalk 23:43, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep - Not listcruft. Bart133 (t) (c) 23:50, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep. Impressive work. I'm no expert but I do have to ask if humans count as a mammal species, in which case this would be about wildlife.Canuckle 00:22, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- That's a valid point, the best name would be list of wild mammal species in Florida, but I decided to stuck with the naming schema that other list use. I used species because a true list of mammals would have to list all subespecies as well, and this is almost a life's project. Btw - thanks to all for the nice comments.--Legionarius 00:36, 20 July 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.