The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 06:09, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
Article doesn't contain any description about the beetle and does not meet WP:GNG (lacks independent sources and doesn't appear to have widespread coverage) Aydoh8 (talk) 02:58, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:36, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
Source assessment table:
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
https://eurekamag.com/research/023/531/023531466.php | I have no idea either, it's not like a species is owned by anyone | original description of species | I won't pay 30 dollars for that one, but these tend to be multiple pages | ✔ Yes |
https://www.catalogueoflife.org/data/taxon/5ZB4D | assumably reliable dataset | the whole page is about the species | ✔ Yes | |
https://www.gbif.org/species/8426863 | per above | per above | ✔ Yes | |
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using ((source assess table)). |
But you're correct on the fact that adding detailed descriptions about beetles can be hard, if the access to the original publication isn't bought. But it does exist. NotAGenious (talk) 11:34, 19 October 2023 (UTC)