Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Natural History of South Asia mailing list


 * 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 -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 15:20, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Natural History of South Asia mailing list

 * – (View AfD) (View log)
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

non notable MLs End33 21:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete appears non notable. I doubt we could find any independent source, but if we do than I would change my vote. --Daniel J. Leivick 00:16, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * DO NOT DELETE, The article should not be deleted for reasons I have written about in the article because of the sheer importance of this list to the NGOs, but the article has to be improved, editors are welcome to improve this page and do more research and add independent sources etc.. This is a very famous list doing very important and urgently needed work. Thanks Atulsnischal 04:16, 2 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete: Non-notable mailing list. Also, unencyclopedic. -Ragib 11:06, 3 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Comments moved to talk page --Ragib 09:31, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. —Quarl (talk) 2007-03-07 10:33Z 




 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletions.   Baka  man  08:23, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete unencyclopaedic. Gillyweed 09:29, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep. I have rewritten the article and properly sourced it.  I've added a section about a prediction of the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake on the list that made headlines. —Quarl (talk) 2007-03-07 10:30Z 
 * Delete. None of the sources or references establish notability. utcursch | talk 13:12, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. This was perhaps one of the first scholarly discussion groups that ever dealt with India. It has produced interesting debates in the past although it later became a site with rhetoric and it does have a large subscription and has lasted since perhaps 1995. The article is currently a mess including the title. If kept, it should be renamed, rewritten in a proper tone. It is perhaps not notable for those who have little to do with the biodiversity of India. With a narrow view like that there are probably more deletables around. Shyamal 04:14, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - Well referenced after the rewirte. Baka man ' 02:03, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I think references are a secondary issue here ... rather the question is whether a "mailing list" is encyclopedic enough to merit an entry. Are there any other examples of articles on mailing lists? --Ragib 02:17, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Plenty Category:Mailing lists ! Shyamal 03:49, 9 March 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.