Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Birds on stamps


 * 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 merge.The original deletion comments asked for the deletion as too narrow a subject, and the last few keep comments state that the article has potential, but the rest of the comments are that it is currently too small. So, I'm merging and redirecting to List of birds on stamps, and if it is expanded, feel free to split it again. Tito xd (?!?) 23:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Birds on stamps
I'm sure there's something wrong with this. Firstly, the page is very small, and secondly, there is not any piece of useful info there. " Birds on stamps is a very common theme in philately. Every country has produced some bird stamps. Often these are masterpieces of stamp design." - even a philatelist or an ornithologist wouldn't find anything of use here. However, this has quite some potential to be rescued and savoured. --Dangherous 12:12, 26 August 2006 (UTC) *Delete, worthless. Nuttah68 21:16, 26 August 2006 (UTC) *Keep due to rewrite by Celithemis. People who rescue articles from AfD deserve congratulations, thanks, and a little bit of honor. Captainktainer * Talk 00:28, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Pretty pointless. -- Necrothesp 14:13, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information Merge with List of birds on stamps --Xyzzyplugh 16:30, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. I have had it with these #&$%@%$@!&*#* birds on these #&$%@%$@!&*#* stamps! :-) Irongargoyle 16:57, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
 * delete sort of important as a topic, but totally useless as an article. M1ss1ontom a rs2k4 (T 20:45, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Much better now. --M1ss1ontom a rs2k4 (T 17:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 *  Weak Keep  There are some rather informative articles (well lists, frankly) at Ships on stamps and People on stamps that I could see being useful to someone. This has the potential to develop into something like that. I agree that the article as it stands has no value, but with work...Dina 22:23, 26 August 2006 (UTC) The rewrite has strengthed my keep, thanks. Dina 09:45, 29 August 2006 (UTC) Merge and redirect per new info about List of birds on stamps Dina 16:37, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep now that I rewrote it as a more respectable stub (using some less than ideal sources, but that can always be worked on.)  &mdash;Cel ithemis  10:40, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep as rewritten, good job Celithemis!!! Carlossuarez46 01:22, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect. Celithemis has put a lot of work into a) salvaging this article and b) now finding the article that this should all go into. Remember, of course, that we need to not violate the GFDL; if anything of the original article that was put up for AfD remains in the current stub, there needs to be a history merge, which will take admin intervention. Captainktainer * Talk 10:39, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. I still question the topic's inclusion, but it was a nicely done re-write. Irongargoyle 00:54, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep as rewritten. It is a humble start, but looks interesting.  RFerreira 07:14, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Update: Sorry, I did not realize that a List of birds on stamps page had already existed. A merge there will suffice as well.  RFerreira 05:37, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete The article appears to be trivial information. I'd have expected this article to have information on stamps that gained some notability, but it appears to be nothing more than a few facts.  talk to JD wants e-mail 09:17, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect. Well, unbeknownst to me when I rewrote the stub, there is already a List of birds on stamps. If the stub were merged and redirected to this page, it would be consistent with Ships on stamps and People on stamps, both of which are similar redirects.  &mdash;Cel  ithemis  09:56, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete these lists still trouble me as Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Looking through a few I've not found a stamp on any of the lists that warrants an article of its own. Whilst this belongs in a Philately reference/catalogue it does not appear to be encyclopedic. Nuttah68 10:28, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - I've cat'ed and linked both ways with List of birds on stamps so it can be found. Now encyclopaedic. BlueValour 03:19, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep as rewritten. The "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information" is not applicable. The topic is well-defined. Mukadderat 17:25, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Has some potential. Birds on stamps no less notable than snakes on planes, I guess. Herostratus 18:14, 4 September 2006 (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.