Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Evolution of Netsepoye hawesi


 * 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. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:32, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Evolution of Netsepoye hawesi

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is so very clearly a high school essay that it is completely unusable. I can't even find anything here that would be worth merging to Netsepoye - just commonplace observations on synapomorphies in chimaeras that are already well covered for that taxon, and don't apply to the species in any particular way. I don't think even a redirect is indicated because who's going to search for that phrase rather than the species name? Nothing worth retaining here, sorry. (and now I successfully feel like a student contributor basher :/ ) Elmidae (talk · contribs) 15:25, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. IntoThinAir (talk) 16:21, 19 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment The references look like they could be worth saving. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 17:24, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Yes you are bad very bad - but also correct.  The references are good but don't really fit the titled topic except in a loose way.  A better merge target is probably Evolution of fish but even there it is hard to see how that can be smoothly accomplished.PRehse (talk) 17:38, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Merge - regardless of the quality of the info, this should never have become a separate article. FunkMonk (talk) 09:00, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete I would welcome the article creator,, adding inline citations to key statements about this particular taxon because I agree with that some of the references are salvageable (I have copied ref 6 over to Netsepoye, but are there any more that are directly relevant?) I realise Phoebe will be disappointed, but there is  simply too much essay-like discussion on general extinctions, and anything left over would be very welcome within the main article. There simply isn't enough to keep this is a standalone piece. (Well worth copying back to your sandbox or to a Word document if you need to show course tutors your work). Nick Moyes (talk) 10:36, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. Despite having ten references, the absence of inline citations makes verification particularly difficult. Of the ten references, only one (Grogan) mentions Netsepoye hawesi in the title. As far as I can tell, that paper is about morphological features, not phylogeny. I suspect that the other papers mention the species only in passing, if at all. Wikipedia's article mentions an estimated extinction date, but does not indicate the earliest fossil date, which is critically important when considering the evolution of a species. Most of the article is not about the species' evolution at all. Axl ¤ [Talk] 14:12, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment This is for my college class. Please be kind not sure why it concerns anyone. It is for an assignment that is all. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phoebemcgowin (talk • contribs) 23:18, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
 * - you need to be aware (and more importantly, your instructor/teacher needs to be aware) that Wikipedia is not meant as a platform for assignments. It is a functional encyclopedia into which well-structured student projects can be integrated as long as the authors follow certain rules. I have explained the major points on your talk page already - our articles are not essays but encyclopedic summaries, and they do not duplicate each other. We do not leave unsuitable articles live, in mainspace, just because they "need to be marked". Your instructor must know that, and should not penalize you for it. I will drop them a note, in any case. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 08:49, 26 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete - Wikipedia is not a place for college essays, but it can be a place for educational projects! They just need to follow the rules of wikipedia, like everything else. -- Shibboleth ink (♔ ♕) 08:59, 26 November 2018 (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.