Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arhopala madytus


 * 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. Invalid nomination. From the nominator's user page: "I used to work on nominating articles for deletion, but due to my misunderstanding of the deletion policy, I was forced to quit that role and now work on expanding stub articles". Geschichte (talk) 07:28, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Arhopala madytus

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not comply with MOS:LIFE JTZegers (talk) 19:31, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Koridas (...Puerto Rico for statehood!) 19:37, 12 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep - Passes WP:SPECIESOUTCOMES, as it has at least one reliable source. The citation simply needs to be an inline citation rather than an external. Koridas (...Puerto Rico for statehood!) 19:39, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep: MOS:LIFE is about how to write about life, not about what to include in the encyclopedia. And as Koridas links above, species are generally notable. Just to be sure I've added some references and copy edited the article. SchreiberBike &#124; ⌨ 20:31, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organisms-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:17, 13 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep No salient reason given for deletion, article complies with all requirements for a taxonomic topic. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 13:34, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Failing to meet manual of style should not be reason for deletion. It can be fixed. No argument for deletion. MistyGraceWhite (talk) 16:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep, separate species deserves a separate article. Cavalryman (talk) 09:12, 14 May 2020 (UTC).


 * Keep. I have referred to WP:DEL-REASON, cannot see on what basis the editor is proposing deletion, and suggest that they familiarise themselves with the policy before any further nominations. A search for this species in Google Books delivers numerous texts and therefore passes NOTABILITY.  William Harris Canis lupis track.svg talk Canis lupis track.svg 05:30, 15 May 2020 (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.