Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Barn Swallows on Postage 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 delete. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 23:01, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

List of Barn Swallows on Postage Stamps

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )


 * Delete this list is not not encyclopedic and its notability is unproven by the sources, many of which are commercial stamp selling sites or online catalogues. Online searches do not provide any results for such a listing at all. If 51 lists of birds on stamps by country were deleted for similar reasons (see Articles for deletion/List of birds on stamps of Bophuthatswana), there is no need or justifiable reason to keep this very narrow listing of one specific bird on postage stamps. If we keep an list of on particular bird on stamps where do we ever stop. A discussion took place seversl years ago about the notability of topical stamps in general and the only one that was considered acceptable was list if people on stamps. We are not a catalogue of stamps and for that reason we also have the wikibooks World Stamp Catalogue that has a topical section though there is yet little content. ww2censor (talk) 17:08, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:31, 28 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. Not encyclopedic and just a list of links. Wikipedia is not a stamp collector fansite. If we go by the reasoning of the AfD mentioned above, this topic is far less notable and more worthy of deletion. Ajf773 (talk) 20:07, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Even the lead is WP:OR. pburka (talk) 20:08, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. With regards to sources --- Scott Standard Postage Stamp catalogue is a common reference work used in the field of philately, and not a commercial catalog. --Jmbranum (talk) 21:23, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete On further thought, I agree that this probably isn't an encyclopedic entry and have instead taken the content and posted it on Wikibooks' worldwide stamp catalogue at
 * Delete - even though the sources are reliable, each citation is a bare mention. (Yes, Scott's is highly reliable.) Bearian (talk) 00:53, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - The sources are reliable, but don't discuss the topic as a whole. Neither do other sources that I can find.  Fails WP:LISTN and WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Hog Farm (talk) 14:08, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. North America1000 16:02, 5 May 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.