Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Animal

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Animal. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Animal|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Animal. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Animal/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Animal

List of artists using bees

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

Does not meet WP:NLIST. The first reference in the list comes close to covering the topic, but it focuses only on New York galleries. The rest are one-offs, and the majority of entries in the list are redlinked. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 23:30, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 23:30, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Lists of people, and Animal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:17, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Insects in art#Bees would be a good place to include significant examples, but most of these artists are not notable. Delete Reywas92^Talk 02:47, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of fictional pachyderms

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

While there's nothing inherently against Wikipedia policy about having this type of page (I don't personally care for them due to their tendency to attract cruft but that's beside the point), this particular one is organized according to an obsolete taxonomic grouping. The page itself does acknowledge this (although its note is incorrect; elephants and rhinoceroses are no longer regarded as closely related), but this raises the question as to why not just base the page on a valid taxonomic grouping. I don't see any advantage to having it done this way. — Anonymous 18:31, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Animal. — Anonymous 18:31, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:06, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This list doesn't have any members of Paenungulata besides elephants, so it could be reasonably just be renamed to "list of fictional elephants" (since woolly mammoths are in Elephantidae), and the rhinoceroses, tapirs and hippopotamuses could be moved back to list of fictional ungulates. -- Recon rabbit 14:58, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of millionaire racehorses in Australia

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

This article is hopelessly out of date and un-sustainable so I believe it needs to be deleted. It is an embarrassment to Wikipedia.

It was created in 2007 by a user who ceased contributing in 2008. That person is still responsible for 60% of the content. I do not believe anyone has carried on maintaining it properly, many have just tinkered with it (myself included).

It is a list of 300 horses who are supposedly the highest earning horses in Australia, I believe that apart from a few of the top earners that have been updated occasionally, the list is hopelessly out of date. I look at today's race guide and quickly found 6 horses who have won well in excess of $1M (or some over $2M) who are not listed.

$1 million is no longer a big amount in racehorse career earnings. For example, today at Randwick there is the Golden Eagle race with a stake of $11.4M and Russell Balding Stakes $3.4M. Today at Flemington there are 2 races worth $2M and another race worth $1M.

The 2nd section of the page has a heading "Currently out-of-date.....". Looking back at "View History" that heading has been there for at least 15 years.

There is a section "Horses still racing". However looking at the list the horses listed are well and truly retired or sadly deceased (such as Viewed who is top of the list and died in 2010). ToddyOC (talk) 05:02, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Horse racing and Australia. ToddyOC (talk) 05:02, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I fully agree with the above. Bduke (talk) 05:18, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal, Lists, and New Zealand. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:53, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per WP:NOTEVERYTHING and especially WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE. Points made in nom are also well-made. Unless these horses are covered as a group somewhere in the future I don't think this sort of list can meet GNG guidelines. Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 14:56, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Anonrfjwhuikdzz and WP:NOTEVERYTHING. Koshuri ^(あ!) 05:24, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete If reliable sources talk about how much money they make, then add it to the lists at List of Melbourne Cup winners and List of Melbourne Cup placings. Dream Focus 20:51, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no evidence of millionaire race horses meeting WP:NLIST, top earning yes but the lowest earning on that source was $10 million USD, well above $1 million AUD. Traumnovelle (talk) 01:04, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lists of fatal shark attacks

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

This article serves the same purpose as a category, which I discovered when I created the Category:Lists of fatal shark attacks. I believe the article should be deleted rather than the category as this fits better under the List parent cat and is better for navigation. This is my first nomination for deletion and I'm very open to feedback. WinstonDewey (talk) 15:00, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It's fine to have a list-of-lists and a category on the same topic. If we for some reason had to pick one of the two, we'd want to delete the category, since categories are much less useful to readers than navigational pages. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 15:10, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment under WP:CLT it is perfectly acceptable to have overlapping categories and lists, so there is not a binary choice between one or the other, both is also acceptable. No other opinion on the nomination for now. 204.111.137.106 (talk) 15:59, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:38, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't specifically recall, but I have an educated guess why I made this. List of fatal shark attacks in the United States goes back to 2006. I generally dislike when we only cover a topic "in the United States", to the point where I wrote an essay about it. As others have noted, redundancy between an article and category isn't necessarily a problem. It might be appropriate to build out List of fatal shark attacksList of fatal shark attacks (which currently redirects to "Lists of..."), though I suspect the US article is long enough that we'd still want it to be separate, probably with a {{main}}. In that case, "Lists of..." redirecting to "List of..." could still be useful. --BDD (talk) 18:02, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The regions are already listed at Shark attack#See also so this is superfluous. Maybe split that up and redirect there if needed. Reywas92^Talk 21:13, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A redirect to a see also section is pretty unusual. "Oppose" is strong, but I'd highly advise against that. Building out List of fatal shark attacksList of fatal shark attacks is an option, as I mentioned, and incorporating the links into a normal section of Shark attack would also be preferable to a see also link. --BDD (talk) 15:22, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
BDD, by "split that up", yes, I was thinking a "List of shark attacks" header that would include these separate from the rest of the see also. That could even be combined with the Notable shark attacks section. — Reywas92^Talk 20:13, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - A category is seemingly enough for this topic. Pranesh Ravikumar (talk) 04:48, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Reywas92 or just redirect to Shark attack#See also. This list is unnecessary. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:26, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep with the intent to merge the articles after AFD. ←Metallurgist (talk) 02:54, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is a valid WP:SETINDEX page for navigation purposes. Most non-editors don't understand or know how to use categories, so this type of page is necessary for the wider public. Categories generally only work well as a navigational tool for editors, not our readers.4meter4 (talk) 14:30, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 06:37, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

keep Agree that per WP:SETINDEX this will be benefitial. Mag2k (talk) 21:07, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Shark_attack#See_also since the information is already there. Redirect List of fatal shark attacks as well, it a valid search term. Dream Focus 20:57, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. Mediocre.marsupial (talk) 09:02, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]