Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:List of mammals of the Vatican City

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was soft delete. Salvio Let's talk about it! 10:59, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Talk:List of mammals of the Vatican City


I see no reason from keeping this talk page (Category:Wikipedia orphaned talk pages that should not be speedily deleted: "This category lists talk pages of deleted or non-existent pages that are in some way useful to the project and therefore should not be deleted per speedy deletion criterion G8."). Bulwersator (talk) 17:24, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I think it contains useful discussion that helps explain why the page was deleted. Keeping it does no harm, and will be useful when someone attempts to create a page on this subject again. Ucucha (talk) 17:56, 8 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Userfy or merge to an article (or its talk page), or delete. We don't want orphaned talk pages on subjects of dubious notability.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:27, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Can Ucucha provide some more background information? Leaving aside the references to humans, the IUCN-based list of bats seem straightforward enough to me. Very likely the Vatican is full of bats. Perhaps the main page should be re-created? -- Klein zach  23:15, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * If the page is recreated, the talk page can be resurrected. As it is, the article was deleted, and we do not retain the contents of talk pages for deleted pages as a matter of course no matter what their content. The straightforward thing to do would be to delete this page, as a housekeeping move, and to bring it back if someone wishes to try again with an article. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 10:29, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I looked it over, but I'm not sure what to think about keeping or deleting. It's surprising that the IUCN says that Homo sapiens sapiens is of least concern in the Vatican: the species appears to fit the second part of the definition of Extinct in the Wild, and given its birth rate of 0.00 in this country, it appears to be moribund.  Nyttend (talk) 13:14, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete, with the possibility of future undeletion if an effort to rewrite ever gets off the ground. Per Chris. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:50, 15 December 2011 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.