Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Migratorius

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 Delete userreq - Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 18:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Migratorius

Migratorius (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Monogyna (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Rubecula (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Oblonga (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

One of Pages from a set of ill-considered disambiguation pages, two of which have already been deleted (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vulgaris‎, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miserabilis‎) and another of which is near deletion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Canus). This one These should also go, for the reasons specified in the other AfDs. Deor (talk) 07:59, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - I was the one who created these articles, and I have been convinced based on the deletion discussions that they should they should be deleted in favour of "G. species" set index articles, as other users have suggested. These disambiguation pages fall into the former category and should be deleted as well: Monogyna, Rubecula, and Oblonga. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neelix (talk • contribs)

OK, I've added those to this AfD. But if you agree they should be deleted, you could just slap {{db-author}} tags on them. Deor (talk) 13:02, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

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.