Talk:Lists of extinct species

WP:DABCONCEPT violation
Lists of lists are not ambiguous if there is a commonality to those lists. In this case, that commonality is Extinction. Normally, the solution to a WP:DABCONCEPT violation like this is to write an article broadly discussing the topic at this title; however, in this case, that article already exists at extinction, which specifically discusses the extinction of both animals and plants at the species level, and which already contains the two links on this page. Therefore, the solution seems to me to be redirecting this title to Extinction. Cheers! bd2412 T 16:24, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I read it less rigidly. There are several other "lists" that need to be here, I've added two.  There are several articles that need to be created and have not been that are separate or sub categories, List of extinct insects, List of extinct arachnids, etc.  These would be added to the list.  Lists of lists aren't always bad, and this seems logical to list the most basic of lists that relate to extinction.  Nothing wrong with having a see also, to extinction, which I will add. Dennis Brown (talk) 18:11, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Lists of lists are not bad, but neither are they ambiguous. Mercury is ambiguous; it may refer to a god, a planet, an element, a car, or a singer, among other things. Extinct species are merely species that are extinct. There is no ambiguous element to justfy calling this a disambiguation page. bd2412  T 18:55, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

I think the appropriate resolution at this point is to move the page to Lists of extinct species. It is becoming even more apparent that this is a list of lists, since none of the titles is of a separate thing such as a song, album, person, or place called "extinct species". bd2412 T 16:59, 10 March 2012 (UTC)


 * That's a very good idea, and I would be on board for that. I get what you are saying now about the lack of ambiguity now. If there ever comes a time when this title needs to be a real db page, we can deal with it then.   Dennis Brown (talk) 17:50, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Good. I will implement this proposal. bd2412  T 17:53, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Now we just need someone to start the two redlinks. I don't think this list needs to differentiate by region (ie: Europe, Asia) and instead focus only on different species, the actual title. The other lists can break it down by region where appropriate.    Dennis Brown (talk) 18:25, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

"Complete list of extinct species" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Complete list of extinct species. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 24 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Elliot321 (talk &#124; contribs) 11:45, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Look at what we humans have to nature
Remember there is no planet B so becareful to what you do to our planet 2A01:C22:AC4F:E200:C9F2:201F:5A0D:21B5 (talk) 07:50, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Where should "Extinct species" lead to?
Currently the redirect "Extinct species" leads here, but I think it should lead to "Extinction" instead. Should that be changed? CheeseyHead (talk) 21:05, 8 July 2024 (UTC)