The result was delete. If you can find anywhere that would take this all you have to do is ask Courcelles 17:11, 15 January 2011 (UTC) reply
The article treats very many (all?) "species" which were hypothesized to might evolve in the documentary The Future is Wild. The species + the periods are treated in a way as if this fiction is a truth. I see (apart from the style issue of presenting fiction as truth) no encyclopedic value in this extensive treatment and regard it as a fan site. The species are not treated extensively in popular culture or science warranting inclusion of an article on that ground. I realize wikipedia has (de facto) much lower standards for notability of lists than of articles, but in view of the treatment of the subject, the introduction of the eras and the length of this list, I have treated this list as an article here. L.tak ( talk) 03:56, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Delete - Per reasons given.
Η936631
(talk) 07:56, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. If you can find anywhere that would take this all you have to do is ask Courcelles 17:11, 15 January 2011 (UTC) reply
The article treats very many (all?) "species" which were hypothesized to might evolve in the documentary The Future is Wild. The species + the periods are treated in a way as if this fiction is a truth. I see (apart from the style issue of presenting fiction as truth) no encyclopedic value in this extensive treatment and regard it as a fan site. The species are not treated extensively in popular culture or science warranting inclusion of an article on that ground. I realize wikipedia has (de facto) much lower standards for notability of lists than of articles, but in view of the treatment of the subject, the introduction of the eras and the length of this list, I have treated this list as an article here. L.tak ( talk) 03:56, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply
Delete - Per reasons given.
Η936631
(talk) 07:56, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
reply