Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wildlife of North America


 * 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. ✗ plicit  03:35, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Wildlife of North America

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Even if this page were improved beyond its horrific present state, there is simply no need for this article. We have Fauna of the United States and Fauna of Canada (although, surprisingly enough, we don't have equivalents for Mexico and most Central American countries; creating those would be a much more reasonable endeavour), and there is no reason the information here cannot be split into those. To put it simply, "Wikipedia is not a dumping ground for random information", according to WP:ENC (emphasis not mine). Admittedly, the examples given in the linked WP:PLOT are a little different, but the general idea and message remain. No matter how much better this article gets, it can never pass that criterion. An anonymous username, not my real name (talk) 01:39, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2022 November 9.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 02:05, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete This is almost a stub article with very little information. We already have articles for the US and Canada. Oaktree b (talk) 02:25, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Overly broad article that is better served at the country level or below. The continental United States is already a very large and geographically diverse area. –LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄ ) 07:58, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:56, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep When I saw this come up on NPP I went halfway through the process of nominating it for deletion myself before I reconsidered. What changed my mind is the existence of well-developed similar articles - Fauna of Asia, Fauna of Australia, Fauna of Europe - that do a very nice job of giving biogeographical summaries at the continental level despite the existence of articles on sub-regions. It obviously can be done, and done well. This article is in suboptimal state right now but it's not useless, and it can be expanded without fundamental issues. (And then there's Fauna of South America. Urgh. Now that could do with redirection until further notice.) -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 09:01, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * My thoughts: This is probably a notable topic but is questionably written, does not elaborate upon any current coverage, sourced poorly, additionally the creator has also been warned for WP:CIR concerns. I don't think it should be kept in the mainspace as its current form. though perhaps draftification could be a decent compromise? Many thanks!  VickKiang  (talk)  05:48, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Draftification is not a compromise. It means that an article will not be seen by readers who may be able to improve it, and will be deleted in six months under WP:G13. We should take the decision here and now as to whether this is a notable topic. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:36, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I would agree that draftification is not an option here, but not because of notability concerns. The notability of the topic can't really be in question. What we have here is a structural issue - is this better treated as individual sub-topics, or is there a benefit in a large-scale overview article? I'd say the articles linked above indicate the latter. Is the current article content then so bad that it has to be nuked? Nope - it's rather bare-bones, consisting mostly of links to sub-topics, but that is fine as a scaffolding for expansion and can easily remain in mainspace in this state. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 13:48, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Solid point, I've striked my suggestion.  VickKiang  (talk)  03:48, 13 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:TNT. Even if this article could be recreated in a much better state, it is almost impossible to improve in its current state because it is too small. 2601:647:5800:4D2:64A4:7B08:985:3C48 (talk) 19:20, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. Currently this is a stub that provides very little information, is overly broad in scope, and does not improve or expand upon its linked pages. Moreover, while posted some decently written topics, others such as Fauna of South America are less well-written, depending on few references. Moreover, I had a glance at Fauna of Australia, but it is similar to the article about Fauna of the United States in that it refers the country Australia IMO instead of referring to the continent Australasia (or Oceania),, I'm not an expert on fauna so please correct me if this is wrong. Several pages this links, e.g., List of mammals of North America and List of reptiles of North America, are significantly more in-depth in contrast, the Habitats section also seems to be a poor version of Geography of North America. With draftifiation not being a suitable option here, therefore, IMHO this version should be probably deleted per WP:TNT as it's preferable to start over entirely a well-sourced one.  VickKiang   (talk)  03:48, 13 November 2022 (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.