Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthropod (2nd nomination)


 * 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. (WP:SNOW) (Non-administrator closure) NorthAmerica1000 00:59, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Anthropod
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This seems like a dictionary article, which belongs in Wiktionary; in fact there is already an article (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/arthropod) The only sources listed are dictionaries, so it doesn't belong in Wikipedia. Llightex (talk) 11:14, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete : actually, as the article makes clear, it is a dictionary non-entry. After deleting, replace with a redirect to Arthropod as a plausible misspelling. הסרפד  (call me Hasirpad) 13:32, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Changing to keep per David Eppstein repurposing of the page to a valid disambiguation. הסרפד  (call me Hasirpad) 23:22, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. Potentially useful navigation page disambiguating a common spelling error that could plausibly refer to two different articles.  The purpose served is similar to the redirect proposed above, but is more useful in the case that the second listed article is the one the user was looking for.  Seems logical to me. JulesH (talk) 20:42, 10 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. There are no legitimate dab entries, so "WP:NODABS" applies. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:51, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:42, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:42, 11 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. I added two legitimate dab entries (one to the parent article of the meaning discussed in the previous AfD and one to a music album with a track by this name). Two entries alone wouldn't ordinarily be enough for a dab page but I think that together with the two common misspellings it should be sufficiently useful as a dab and too much to put into hatnotes instead. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:20, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Update: Now three entries. All three refer to subtopics of other articles but that should nevertheless be enough for a dab. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:32, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - now a reasonable dab page. Pam  D  05:13, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep valid page with entries meeting MOS:DABMENTION. Boleyn (talk) 07:19, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep, seems like a content issue from the get-go - http://stats.grok.se/en/latest90/Anthropod shows it to be a fairly common search term. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 19:51, 14 August 2014 (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.