Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of plants poisonous to equines


 * 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. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:46, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

List of plants poisonous to equines

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

The category "Category:Plants poisonous to equines" was recently deleted; this seems a far more appropriate place to put these, rather than a list which has to be linked in the "see also" of each page, even though it is not related to them, and maintained separately. Verisimilus  T  17:33, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * To the contrary, the category was deleted after a CfD discussion which decided to listify. Honestly, I think that the list is mostly pointless, as many of these plants, such as the rhododendrons, are already poisonous to most animal species. However, I created the list as carrying out consensus from the CfD discussion, which can be found at:
 * Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_December_19

Vox Rationis (Talk | contribs) 22:12, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 16:16, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. Needs citations for each entry, but it's a useful supplement to Equine nutrition. -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 18:06, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep and improve though a list of scientific names is kind of hard to use without more info like common names and some other basics, no one is going to click on every article to see what it is. Horses are a bit different from other livestock because of their joint status as a companion animal  and a grazing animal, they can get into things that are not an issue for either, say, cows or dogs.  Montanabw (talk) 01:38, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, seems to be a useful entry for an encyclopedia to have, even if it needs improving. Bob talk 13:30, 5 February 2008 (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.