Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chilean blue whale


 * 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 delete. Whether a redirect is useful can be discussed separately if redirects are creted.  Sandstein  15:22, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Chilean blue whale

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Dubious self-published content added to Wikipedia by the author himself. Does not appear to follow proper peer review or taxon description processes and as such the taxon is not currently, and unlikely ever to be, found in reliable secondary sources. Presence on user-generated content sites such as Zoobank and Biolib are sometimes explicitly listed as having been added by the author or are the result of automated propagation (ZooBank records imported to GBIF). On WoRMS, expert editors have noted, "unaccepted - online publication only; does not meet the ICZN requirements for e-publications".

The only other article created by the author is Urocaridella renatekhalafae, which was by WoRMS as a junior synonym of Urocaridella cyrtorhyncha (to which I've currently redirected it). See also previous deletion discussion on German Wikipedia regarding another self-published taxon, the "Gaza house mouse". Content posted should be closely examined. Hyperik ⌜talk⌟ 14:47, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. Hyperik ⌜talk⌟ 14:47, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Hyperik ⌜talk⌟ 14:47, 13 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete (Thanks for digging in, Hyperik. I had not noticed that U. renatekhalafae was listed as a junior synonym.) It is not unusual for newly described species to be restricted to ZooBank for a period, if the description was published online only. However, in the case of this author I think we have that rare case where the usual trust in the nomenclator should not be extended. All descriptions were published in the Palestinian Biological Bulletin, which frankly is that guy's private blog. The house mouse episode casts solid doubts on his research ethics and capabilities (slooow link to that gobsmacking "publication" here). Independent peer review seems absent. Finally, the author's demonstrated penchant for self-promotion (his article about himself was deleted: Articles for deletion/Norman Ali Khalaf), while not a crucial factor, certainly does nothing to increase willingness to AGF. - These articles should be removed until reliable and independent sources take up or confirm the descriptions. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 16:46, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Balaenoptera musculus un-named subsp. Chilean blue whale. [Branch et al. 2007] . I really have no idea if that means anything for the Afd or not. Branch is fiveby(zero) 18:33, 13 June 2020 (UTC) Blue whale needs cleaned up after Afd, seems widely accepted as a population, but removed from list as subspecies in 2019. fiveby(zero) 18:54, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah I saw a few mentions in reliable sources of it potentially being a subspecies. I'd be fine with a delete and redirect Chilean blue whale to blue whale for now until a reliable source regarding its acceptance as a separate taxon comes through. A self-published source that itself has numerous references to Wikipedia written/edited by the author doesn't pass muster. —Hyperik ⌜talk⌟ 19:07, 13 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete, unreliably sourced. Could be recreated if reliable sources emerge. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:03, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete, Trapania norakhalafae and Diaphorodoris olakhalafi, based only on self published sources and not recognized. fiveby(zero) 12:59, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Chilean blue whale, was an unnamed subspecies in the 2017 Society for Marine Mammalogy list, but removed 2019. A redirect might be appropriate, but none of the content should be merged due to issues raised above. Defer to the taxonomy geeks tho if they have more informed opinions. fiveby(zero) 13:28, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge While the subspecies is not currently accepted, the research and data are still present here on the population and other subspecies as well. I would suggest deleting this page but moving the more informative sections of the article over to the Blue whale page. --BronxZooFan (talk) 18:17, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * What material exactly would that be? Seems like anything not produced by von Jaffa is already in Blue whale, and the rest we don't want... -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 18:21, 17 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Blue whale. The term is used in some literature . Does not appear to be consensus this is a subspecies, a population maybe has wider support. Redirecting is cheap here.--Eostrix (talk) 05:43, 18 June 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.