Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Red kite feeding in Wales (2nd nomination)

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 redirect to Red_kite#Observation. Previous closure was way out of process, but the end result seems unlikely to upset anyone. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:39, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Red kite feeding in Wales

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

Following deletion discussion on November 18, resulting in merge, merge has now been completed into Red kite#Observation. Mountain^cirque 15:42, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:08, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wales-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:08, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:10, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The previous Afd was a non-admin closure to merge, by Davey2010, after just 1 day, with two merge !votes. Which I wouldn't have done. But anyway. The nominator (of both Afds) then added a single sentence to Red kite#Observation. None of this was contested. Does the nominator simply want to redirect to the target article now? If so, we don't need an Afd. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:16, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think that about covers it; there wasn't much more than one sentence's worth of additional material. Suggest just replacing the former article with a redirect now.--Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:34, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'd do it myself, right now, if the previous Afd had been allowed to run its normal course. But the quick non-admin closure gives me pause, so I'll let someone else do it. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:42, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 19:34, 23 December 2016 (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.