Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shapcott Lavender


 * 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 Buddleja davidii. Consensus is clearly in favour of removing the page, the only question is where to move its material. There are two plausible candidates and almost equal support and only a weak argument (the "crufty" point) that favours one of these over the other; thus going by that opinion but I stress that this AFD is not a bar to creating a cultivar list if consensus arises somewhere else to do so. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:51, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Buddleja davidii 'Shapcott Lavender'

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

If as little as is known about it as the article suggests, then it probably has not been discussed in multiple reliable sources and so we shouldn't have an article about it. Coming here rather than prodding it as I know little about biology and this may be inherently notable. Laun chba ller 12:03, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organisms-related deletion discussions. Laun chba ller  12:03, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:18, 16 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Merge to Buddleja davidii or create Buddleja davidii cultivars per Icewhiz. --MrClog (talk) 14:16, 16 July 2019 (UTC) Keep - A quick search on Google Scholar for the scientific name finds this, this, this, and this. --MrClog (talk) 12:23, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Those sources all refer to Buddleja davidii.-- Laun chba ller 12:34, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Doesn't the article itself say that's the same thing? Hugsyrup (talk) 12:44, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Shapcott Lavender is a cultivar of Buddleja davidii, one of 180 according to the cultivation section of the species article. Species may be inherently notable but cultivars are not. Peter James (talk) 13:05, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh, my God, there are hundreds of them. Are any of them notable?-- Laun chba ller 13:11, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Some may be. Another cultivar was discussed in 2012 at Articles for deletion/Buddleja 'Flutterby' Lavender; the result was 'keep', but several editors mentioned possibility of merging to a list. Peter James (talk) 13:30, 16 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Merge to Buddleja davidii or create Buddleja davidii cultivars for this article + some 10-50-100-? other cultivars of Buddleja davidii that aren't independently notable. There isn't much on this specific cultivar besides it existing. Wikipedia is not a seed catalog?Icewhiz (talk) 13:18, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment, Buddleja davidii are wonderful shrubs (insects, especially butterflies love them), and yes, there are lots of varieties but not all of them are wikinotable, the suggestion of a list article though admirable is veering into crufty territory, listing at Buddleja davidii (of notable ones only, not this one) is a sensible suggestion. Coolabahapple (talk) 16:02, 19 July 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.</b> 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.