Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fatal cougar attacks in North America by decade


 * 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, apparently a little reminder that we're not always on the top of the food chain. Carlossuarez46 17:53, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

List of fatal cougar attacks in North America by decade

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

A list of non-notable people. A brief mention in the Cougar article about the numbers of fatal attacks adn their geographic distribution would be sufficient. Corvus cornix 22:30, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and reference better with standard citations. The individuals are non-notable thats why they don't have individual article. Cougar attacks are important because they are used in the debate on their endangered status, and whether they should be hunted. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 22:55, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete with a mini-merge to Cougar. Seems pretty indiscriminate to me.  I agree with Corvus cornix in that a brief summarized version of these statistics on the Cougar page would serve the same purpose.  -- ShinmaWa(talk) 23:01, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment A one paragraph summary with numbers would do the job. The names and ages of individuals don't tell you anything a summary wouldn't. MarkBul 23:27, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep As the articles principal author, I think I should put in my two cents. First, this is the fifth article in a series of fatal animal attack lists in Wikipedia. There is a list of fatal shark attacks, wolf attacks, bear attacks and alligator attacks. I'm working currently on a list of fatal snake bite victims, and other users are currently working on other animals. Second, nationally recognized magazines like Field and Stream and Outdoor Life chronicle these events, why shouldn't Wikipedia. In order to address Mr. Richard Arthur Norton's concerns:  I'm still working on the Notes and References, so you will see a dramatic improvement in this section that will address your concerns.  (I thought it was important to put in the basic references contemporaneously.) --Hokeman 00:00, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a justification for this page. And Wikipedia is not a chronicle of everything. MarkBul 00:43, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep While Wikipedia is not a news archive, the large body of news stories over the years about cougar attacks (including a number of stories about cougar attacks in general rather than a particular single attack, show that this topic satisfies WP:N. I might not agree with an article about each attack which makes the newspapers, but collectively they are notable and a documented list is appropriate. See Google News archive with 28,900 news articles about either specific cougar attacks ot the attacks collectively. Since each gets news coverage each could get an inline reference, and general information could be referenced to the articles which discuss what causes the attacks, who the targets tend to be, etc. Edison —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edison (talk • contribs) 03:10, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep: Perfectly valid list criteria, there aren't that many cougar attacks, perhaps a name change to "documented" cougar attacks is in order. The phenomenon of cougars attacking humans is definitely notable. IvoShandor 08:55, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep: I'm really just a user of Wikipedia and I find an list of this type with the details like this to be worth it (I do have a concern as to why document this type of thing, must be another motive... but in general the list isn't a bad idea, combining it down to a summery just wouldn't be enough even though I think that also should be done in the cougar article. Strawberry Island 20:44, 8 September 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.