Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of invasive species in the Mid-Atlantic region of the United States


 * 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 to  List of invasive species in North America. SarahStierch (talk) 08:50, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

List of invasive species in the Mid-Atlantic region of the United States

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )


 * Delete. Invasive species should be listed by political jurisdiction and/or by biogeographical region. The Mid-Atlantic region is neither.-- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 03:56, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of US-related deletion discussions. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 03:56, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 03:56, 17 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge all of this, including List of invasive species in the Mid-Atlantic region of the United States, Invasive plants of Wisconsin, List of invasive plant species in New Jersey, and any others similar to it (I'm leaving out the everglades one specifically just because it's such a distinct biome that I imagine there's specific reliable sources to it... but I wouldn't be wholly opposed to it being included) to List of invasive species in North America. If List of invasive species in North America becomes big enough to justify a fork, then we can begin breaking out by region. But the state-specific articles are way too specific. I disagree with Liefting that it should be by political jurisdiction, at least on a state level. If anything it should be by country, or by "biogeographical" region. Shadowjams (talk) 04:25, 17 August 2012 (UTC)


 * While an invasive species spreads over a given biome or other biogeographical area, the definition of whether it is invasive and the control of the species is done at a political level - hence my rationale for having articles defined at the state level. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 05:27, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. 00:28, 18 August 2012 (UTC)  • Gene93k (talk) 00:28, 18 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - or split to the by-state level. Invasive species in the Everglades is notable as a distinct biome with a distinct problem; most sources will be at the state level for other areas; this grouping, however, is somewhat nebulous - the "mid-atlantic" area covers a lot of jurisdictions and more than a few biomes. - The Bushranger One ping only 08:15, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep without prejudice to a future merge, rename, or similar reorganization of this information. Disagreement with the scope of the article is not a justification for deletion, and the other issues can be addressed with normal editing. If reliable sources categorize their information this way - and they do- deletion should be off the table. Xymmax So let it be written   So let it be done  15:04, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   06:05, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Merge up to the continental level - as per Shadowjams. And table-ize to provide more than 'just' a list of names. state/province level lists would be painful to maintain (overlapping info) and provide very little insight into the spread of these invaders. (the Article is about the invaders, not the politics that surrounds them) Exit2DOS • Ctrl • Alt • Del 18:53, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SarahStierch (talk) 22:30, 2 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge per the suggestions from editors above. Disagreement with the criterion for topics being included in an article is not a valid rationale for outright deletion, which would be too hasty in this case. Northamerica1000(talk) 18:17, 3 September 2012 (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.