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. Consensus is to Keep this article but I really hope the editors advocating Keep can work on improving it with more inline citations. Liz Read! Talk! 07:47, 6 April 2024 (UTC) reply

History of elephants in Europe

History of elephants in Europe (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

most of the article is an indiscriminate list of historical occurrences where elephants might have been involved. ltb d l ( talk) 08:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. ltb d l ( talk) 08:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal and Europe. WCQuidditch 10:51, 27 March 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Looks like a potentially valid topic. Deletion is not cleanup. Is there a reason this page must go? Srnec ( talk) 00:43, 1 April 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. I can't see an issue. It's a valid article about recorded instances of exotic animals turning up in an area to which they're not native in pre-modern times. As long as it's sourced that's fine. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 12:23, 2 April 2024 (UTC) reply
    it's not sourced. did you read the article? ltb d l ( talk) 02:00, 3 April 2024 (UTC) reply
    Have you looked at the sources in the subsection helpfully named "Sources"? Cortador ( talk) 07:56, 4 April 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per above. Article is decently sourced, so I don't get why the nom is claiming that it isn't. Seems fine to keep as is in my opinion. CycloneYoris talk! 09:30, 3 April 2024 (UTC) reply
    have i gone mad? are we reading the same article? ltb d l ( talk) 09:33, 3 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 01:55, 4 April 2024 (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.
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. Consensus is to Keep this article but I really hope the editors advocating Keep can work on improving it with more inline citations. Liz Read! Talk! 07:47, 6 April 2024 (UTC) reply

History of elephants in Europe

History of elephants in Europe (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

most of the article is an indiscriminate list of historical occurrences where elephants might have been involved. ltb d l ( talk) 08:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. ltb d l ( talk) 08:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal and Europe. WCQuidditch 10:51, 27 March 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Looks like a potentially valid topic. Deletion is not cleanup. Is there a reason this page must go? Srnec ( talk) 00:43, 1 April 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. I can't see an issue. It's a valid article about recorded instances of exotic animals turning up in an area to which they're not native in pre-modern times. As long as it's sourced that's fine. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 12:23, 2 April 2024 (UTC) reply
    it's not sourced. did you read the article? ltb d l ( talk) 02:00, 3 April 2024 (UTC) reply
    Have you looked at the sources in the subsection helpfully named "Sources"? Cortador ( talk) 07:56, 4 April 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per above. Article is decently sourced, so I don't get why the nom is claiming that it isn't. Seems fine to keep as is in my opinion. CycloneYoris talk! 09:30, 3 April 2024 (UTC) reply
    have i gone mad? are we reading the same article? ltb d l ( talk) 09:33, 3 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 01:55, 4 April 2024 (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.

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook