Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Florida Shorebird Database


 * 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. Daniel (talk) 00:55, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Florida Shorebird Database

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable per WP:WEB. It is sourced to the official website and I found no significant coverage. SL93 (talk) 01:07, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. SL93 (talk) 01:07, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 01:37, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 01:37, 4 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep. This search shows lots of references at Google Search. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:39, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if you actually opened those links. I only see trivial mentions such as this and non-independent coverage such as this. There is less than two pages worth of such sources. SL93 (talk) 01:47, 4 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Reference review: Refbombing citations at the end of the article isn't a good thing to do.
 * First reference - Official website.
 * Second reference - It is from both the Florida Shorebird Database and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. It even says, "This data was collected primarily by members of the Florida Shorebird Alliance (FSA)".
 * Third reference - A university thesis that makes a one sentence mention - "This project would not have been possible without the many members of the Florida Shorebird Alliance".
 * Fourth reference - I see no mention of the website.
 * Fifth reference - A part of a list of similar websites with this as coverage - "Online tool for entering and exploring data on Florida’s shorebirds and seabirds, developed and maintained by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission".
 * Sixth reference - A paper from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service which is the partner of the organization that started the website.
 * Seventh reference - Only coverage in the article - "The Florida Shorebird Database, monitored by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, shows approximately 186 black skimmer nests were active on Sand Dollar's north tip last year."
 * How does this help? SL93 (talk) 02:03, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Citations in academic articles help to establish notability for individual scientists. They should also for this database. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 04:25, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete I use this type of conservation database evey day in my work, and they are indispensable for regional ecological studies and management plans. However, that does not mean that there is encyclopedic notability here. Most US states with a functioning conservation plan maintain a few variants of this, with a greater or lesser web presence, and they are used as sourcing for all kinds of publications, but there's generally very little public-facing coverage. Merely getting cited does not notability make (otherwise we'd have ten thousand more BLPs on scientists). Maybe a better case could be made for the organization itself, the Florida Shorebird Alliance, but again this seems pretty badly covered. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 02:40, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  02:28, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable and lacking in sources. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 23:46, 17 October 2021 (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.