Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of semiaquatic organisms


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 22:15, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

List of semiaquatic organisms

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This page mostly serves as the target of a redirect from Semiaquatic and Semi-aquatic. There is no clear criteria for inclusion in the list and if there were to be a list of creatures who meet the Wiktionary definition for semi-aquatic, it would be exceedingly long and unhelpful. I propose that the links above be changed to a soft redirect to the Wiktionary definition and the few links directly to this page changed to that soft redirect. SchreiberBike &#124; ⌨  01:56, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organisms-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:54, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:54, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:54, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete List is woefully incomplete, and the concept of "semiaquatic organisms" has fuzzy boundaries. Dictionary definition will serve readers better than a shoddy list. Plantdrew (talk) 05:08, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep, any list is better than none for someone searching for semi-aquatic organisms. Siuenti (talk) 11:19, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Some consideration should be given to restricting the list to a more manageable taxonomic category, such as "List of semiaquatic vertebrates" or "List of semiaquatic mammals". WolfmanSF (talk) 15:30, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Given that Aquatic animal and Terrestrial animal are both article subjects, it is difficult to escape the conclusion that an article on semiaquatic lifestyles is also merited. Perhaps this would be better handled by an article with more description, rather than simply a list of examples. WolfmanSF (talk) 18:50, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete and start article Semiaquatic and/or Semiaquatic animal and Semiaquatic plant) so that the concept is explained. Any list could include millions of species, potentially.Borock (talk) 20:49, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Your logic is "there are a lot of these things, so we won't help you find any of them"? Siuenti (talk) 21:47, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95  Talk  10:58, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not all topics are well-served by lists. The definition of semi-aquatic is not firmly established, and different authors employ the term differently. That makes it an excellent topic for an article, explaining the different senses of the term, their history, and discussing key example taxa. On the other hand, it makes for a terrible premise for a list, especially an unmanageably large one such as this would be. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 13:15, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete The term semi-aquatic has no single accepted scientific definition, making any inclusion criteria dodgy. Also, even if we were to overcome this problem, there would be millions of potential entries. These organisms would be far better served by a . Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:28, 9 August 2015 (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.