Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of birds by common name


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure) Mkdw talk 09:05, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

List of birds by common name

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

It is of next to no use to readers. It is not actually a list of birds by common name. It is a list that is separated into the common names of groups of birds. The articles and categories relating to the groups such as owls, penguins, parrots etc are of a far greater use than this list. WP editors have a fixation for lists over actual prose and this is yet another example. Additionally, if the list was complete it would apparently contain 9,721 entries. This is unwieldy for one page and I would oppose the creation of any Lists of groups of birds by common name or suchlike. There are comments on the talk page about the utility of this page. Can they be used as pseudo-votes?? -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 05:55, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. 05:57, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. 05:57, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:LISTPURP, a functional navigational aid, particularly per the number of page views the page has: see Wikipedia article traffic statistics for this article. With page views consistently over 1,000 per day, the article is certainly of use to Wikipedia's readers. Also keep per WP:NOTDUP. Unimpressed with the deletion rationale here. Northamerica1000(talk) 13:42, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Odd. It is more popular than List of birds. Anyway popular does not mean it is good. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 17:44, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Obviously birds are a notable topic and one of great interest. List of birds lists them by their scientific names and so is not so useful to the average reader.  This list lets non-experts easily find the article on the bird they are interested in.  It also provides an overview of the relatedness of bird species. Steve Dufour (talk) 22:47, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organisms-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 19:46, 22 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep for reasons given by Northamerica1000 and Steve Dufour. This is a valid and useful resource for an encyclopedia to have. --Orlady (talk) 21:09, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep as useful resource. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:46, 22 January 2013 (UTC).
 * Keep Common sense really. This is a useful list for people to find what they are looking for.  Something this obvious shouldn't even have to be explained.   D r e a m Focus  01:14, 25 January 2013 (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.