Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Turtle walk


 * 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 Sea turtle. Spartaz Humbug! 15:57, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Turtle walk

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article largely consists of synthesis of material that could be covered at Sea_turtle, or in similar sections of specific species, and material about completely non-notable organizations and individuals. No substantive sources about the general concept: such sources as there give passing mentions to "turtle walks" as tourist attractions. PROD unsurprisingly contested, with no rationale, by Andrew Davidson. Vanamonde (talk) 18:29, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Turtle conservation is quite notable and so it is easy to find sources such as this. The conservationist, Satish Bhaskar, who is highlighted in the article, seems quite prominent in the field – see The Leatherback Turtle: Biology and Conservation, for example.  The claim of synthesis is a vague wave unsupported by any details or discussion – the article didn't even have a talk page when I found it.  Andrew D. (talk) 18:41, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, turtle conservation would be a notable subject. This isn't about turtle conservation. Satish Bhaskar might be a notable subject. This article isn't about him, either. I don't see where you're going with this, aside from a knee-jerk "keep". Vanamonde (talk) 18:43, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Andrew D. (talk) 18:50, 19 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment To be clear, if someone wishes to write an article about turtle conservation, and redirect this there, I have no problems with that. This article, however, is bunk. Vanamonde (talk) 18:59, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 20:31, 19 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete and redirect to Sea_turtle for time-being; wherein a line is enough. Change target, if someone writes up something on Turtle conservation, which currently stands redirected to this article (typical Colonel-Warden-stuff). Agree with nom about the triviality of the mentions. &#x222F; WBG converse 12:15, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
 * One further comment: the article at the moment relies heavily on a single book; the author of the book also appears to be the founder of one of the groups discussed in the article . As such, the book is not an intellectually independent source. Vanamonde (talk) 05:37, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete and redirect as suggested above. I agree with the arguments presented by Vanamonde and WBG.  Peacock (talk) 13:12, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Meets WP:GNG. Amply sourced already.  No compliance with WP:Before.  7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 17:05, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
 * As I've said before, the topic of turtle conservation is a viable one. Most of the material in this article is far better suited to an article about turtle conservation, and indeed most of the sources here only describe turtle walks as an example of turtle conservation efforts. This title is not workable, and indeed creates neutrality problems, because by framing the material in this really odd way, we're missing a lot of other aspects of this topic. Or to put it another way; if there existed an article about turtle conservation, this would not be a valid spinoff. Vanamonde (talk) 17:41, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
 * The Turtle conservation article does not exist. Your argument is a pure hypothetical straw man fallacy. If it did, I might (hypothetically speaking) support merger.  You have not addressed the fact that the concept is itself notable. We will have to disagree.
 * Nor did you address in a convincing way the fact that WP:GNG is fulfilled, and that WP:Before was apparently disregarded. The article has already been improved. 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 18:17, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
 * It has indeed been improved. It would be improved a lot further if we simply moved it and readded the material I had to removed as irrelevant: this was not a viable option at the time I opened this. Furthermore, my concerns with promotionalism and use of non-independent sources remain. "The ultimate turtle walker though was Satish Bhaskar..." Vanamonde (talk) 18:28, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Merge, as above. Szzuk (talk) 19:59, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor 22:46, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep or Retitle Readded the material that Vanamonde deleted.  It was already there.  Retitling this works for me.  7&amp;6=thirteen (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 01:12, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
 * See, that's kind of my point. That "Turtle patrol" is very relevant; but at the moment clearly inappropriate, because it isn't a turtle walk; it's in a vehicle, for chrissake. I haven't removed it again because I'm not interested in an edit-war over something that silly; but it is definitely silly. Retitling and reworking, dumping the puffery and the material sourced to non-independent sources would be a big help. Oh, and you should probably strike your !vote above, as this is a duplicate at the moment. Vanamonde (talk) 01:18, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Both parties are right. This material should be summarized in Sea_turtle generally like "around the world there are people who walk the beaches looking for turtles" etc. It then links to the main article, where more detail is given about specific places in the world. There are so many regional details that it would easily drown Sea_turtle with too much weight. It needs a place to beach where they can be examined in more detail. -- Green  C  16:02, 28 November 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">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.