Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/O. cornutus

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. Somebody created stubs for all the red links. (non-admin closure) Pcap ping 18:47, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

O. cornutus

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

Also:

These dab between red links. Some blue links were added, but appear non-specific. The whole idea of disambiguating between contracted prefixes seems rather dubious. Pcap ping 23:06, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, likely search terms, directing readers to the best available page. Polarpanda (talk) 23:29, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Polarpanda. For more information, please see previous discussions about these disambiguation pages here, here, and here. Neelix (talk) 02:26, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The consensus in those discussions seems to be against such pages, not for them. Pcap ping 02:41, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- For clarification, I included links to the previous discussions here so that there could be a continuity in the discussion rather than a series of isolated ones. Nonetheless, you may want to review the discussions again; the concensus in the past has been to keep these disambiguation pages. You may want to review these deletion discussions also: here and here. Species epithet disambiguation pages, like Miserabilis and Canus, have not been generally accepted, but "G. species" disambiguation pages have. This is a proper form of disambiguation page, one that is helpful and likely for users to use in searching for specific species. Neelix (talk) 19:20, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki to Wiktionary, works perfectly well as dicdefs. 76.66.197.17 (talk) 05:09, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- It may be good to have these disambiguation pages on Wiktionary as well, but they are needed here. The purpose is not to make this an article, but to help disambiguate "G. species" epithets which are ambiguous. Neelix (talk) 19:20, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Well then, copy to wiktionary, regardless of whether it is deleted here or not. 76.66.197.17 (talk) 07:43, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. —Polarpanda (talk) 16:41, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep now has two bluelinks, doesn't read like a dict def. Boleyn2 (talk) 18:42, 16 January 2010 (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.