Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Florida Black Racer


 * 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 and redirect to Coluber constrictor priapus. Seraphimblade Talk to me 06:29, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Florida Black Racer

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Apparently no such snake exists. Montchav 19:21, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

The original authour wrote the following on the page, after getting rid of the AFD tag - --Montchav 14:29, 14 March 2007 (UTC):

The author removed this page because it was targeted for removal by someone calling himself Montchav who erroneously believes Black Racers either don't exist or do not exist in Florida. The photos were taken by a Florida naturalist who has identified the snakes as Black Racers—a fully recognized snake species. He wrote a 100% accurate article and kept it brief thus allowing room for other contributions. Simply checking the Audubon Guides he mentioned would have clarified this for Montchav. In my opinion the whole concept of Wikipedia does not rise beyond the level of writing as a hobby and this treatment proves that to be the case. The term encylopedia is being misused.

The original author also wrote: The issue is settled. Someone doesn't believe the creature in question actually exists so it has been recommended for deletion. Facts are not apparently important so let's just delete it speedily. The author/naturalist votes to delete it. The article is too serious for your interpretation of an encyclopedia. Let us not waste time. Funny story—in coming additions I planned to include information about Black Racers not hibernating in Florida. I have already encountered one this pre spring—apparently it was an illusion. Delete the article!


 * Speedy Keep but rename to Black Racer and generalize. Too many google hits from too many reliable sources (umass biology dept., etc.) for this to be a hoax article.  Existing article in desperate need of wikification and new author apparently needs help.   Irene Ringworm 02:44, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

You win. The guy who buys ink by the barrel always wins. Just delete the article and allow us to use our energy for more constructive pursuits.


 * To the original author : Plesae keep the discussions about the article on this page, or on Talk:Florida Black Racer. --Montchav 15:39, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

There is no article. There is nothing to discuss. Before User Montchav recommended something for deletion a little research should have been done. Is this how people research articles? That calls their credibility as well as the credibility of Wikipedia into question. We could debate classifying Black Racers into sub species such as Everglades Black Racer, Eastern Black Racer, Florida Black Racer, Southern Black Racer etc but for a person who claims the role of an editor to simply say "Apparently no such snake exists" is astonishing. When I first began considering Wikipedia I ran across an article about President Zimpher of the University of Cincinnati. Horrible things were said about this decent person and I followed to see what would happen and how long it would take to make corrections. Before I began submitting edits and articles I tested the waters with a few harmless and facetious additions and observed the process. I was satisfied that the concept could work but this idea of listing something you know absolutely nothing about as an article for deletion has changed my opinion. In my opinion, Wikipedia is close to the old idea that a broken clock is correct twice a day. Such a clock is worthless and dusting and polishing such a broken timepiece is pointless. Delete the article! --Neilnat Get rid of that junk!!--74.104.224.214 22:46, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Right, get rid of it—isn't there still a way to speedily delete it? Delete it, please--Neilnat
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 13:33, 16 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep or Merge? - I hope the original author is not discouraged by this incident. Even though an article is nominated for deletion, it is by no means deleted. It is unforntunat that the nominator didn't cite the article as unreferenced to provide a chance for addiotonal supporting information to be added by other editors.  A quick look around brings up Coluber constrictor priapus which is the southern black racer.  From what I can glean, this may be the same snake, but I'm not a herpetologist, and would defer to experts whether a keep or merge is in order. -- Whpq 16:28, 16 March 2007 (UTC)


 * As pointed out above the southern black racer is a real snake. I do not believe that the Florida Black Racer is a made-up or imaginary snake but rather a local colloquialism to refer to the same snake.  As such the best course of action would probably be to merge any attributable information to Coluber constrictor priapus as suggested by Whpq.  There also exists an Everglades racer Coluber constrictor paludicola without an article that may be a more correct choice for a redirect, but without any info on that snake or knowing for sure which the term "Florida Black Racer" actually refers to.  In the meantime, keep this article until it can be decided where it should be merged to. Arkyan 16:47, 16 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge with Coluber constrictor priapus (which is even more stubby than this one) and redirect. It appears not to be a hoax; however, it needs more sources to comply with WP:ATT.  Sources are almost certainly available, and editors should work to find them.  This article should not be deleted at this time.  If sources are not forthcoming, the deletion issue can be revisited in a few months.  ≈≈Carolfrog≈≈♦тос♦ 00:31, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Upon re-reading the author's screeds, I found references to Audubon guide sources that were apparently mentioned somewhere.  So I re-read the article more carefully, and did find passing references to them.  I guess that shows that we all should probably read more carefully.  :)  In any case, I formatted them properly in the article, and now it not only passes WP:ATT (which it probably always did, if sorta informally), it even looks like it passes!  :)   ≈≈Carolfrog≈≈♦тос♦ 03:03, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. It would be inappropriate to delete this article based solely on the author's request to delete it.  In my opinion it doesn't qualify for deletion under CSD G7.  The article subject is notable and encyclopedic, and the author licensed his contributions under the GDFL.  S/he cannot now withdraw the information s/he added to the database. The article will make a good starting point for an encyclopedic and necessary Wikipedia article on the Black Racer, under whatever title it comes to rest.  ≈≈Carolfrog≈≈♦тос♦ 04:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep but should either rename or merge. CSD G7 cannot apply as this is fully WP:A-able. - Penwhale | Blast him / Follow his steps 06:02, 23 March 2007 (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.