Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 13:42, 7 November 2018

African lion

New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

African lion (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is superfluous to our current profusion of lion articles. As well as lion we have pages on the two main subspecies. This page does not correspond to any taxonomic entity, but covers about 98% of all lions (i.e. all but a tiny population in India). If it exists at all it should be at "lions in Africa" but even then realistically almost all the information should be elsewhere on wikipedia already. These articles are often degraded with many well-meaning edits by people using poor-quality sources as well so often end up being detrimental to the project as a whole. Any excess information that can't fit on the parent page (lion) could go on one of the subspecies pages (now being determined by a merging process. See Talk:Lion#Proposed_merger_of_Northern_lion_and_Panthera_leo_leo Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:08, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU 20:31, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU 20:32, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Agree. Page title can be used to redirect to main lion page, as in this diff of March 2009. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 21:21, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

• Comment I think that this page should be redirected here. Template:Long line Punetor i Rregullt5 (talk) 05:45, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Good idea!! -- BhagyaMani (talk) 07:59, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

@BhagyaMani and Punetor i Rregullt5: How's that supposed to happen? The information here is huge, and it's much more than just about distribution. Leo1pard (talk) 08:05, 7 November 2018 (UTC); edited 08:07, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

THIS page is not the purpose of that discussion about how to integrate the info. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 08:12, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Then why did you mention it? How are you going to do that if you don't know how to? Leo1pard (talk) 08:27, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Continue at Talk:African_lion#No_such_thing_as_the_African_lion. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 09:10, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

I was already there, but you didn't go there. Leo1pard (talk) 12:36, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

• Keep, this is a highly WP:Notable topic that has been covered in various WP:Reliable sources and contains a lot of information that would be difficult to merge in other pages, which renders this article's nomination for deletion a case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT. For example, the Cat Specialist group, which revised subspecies in 2017, continued to use the name "African lion" to describe the genetically diverse population of lions in Africa which are split up to northern and southern subspecies, as it continued to use the names of other notable populations that aren't recognized by them as subspecies anymore, and admitted that there was uncertainty over their reclassification of the subspecies, due to a lack of morphological analysis, and the fact that two recently recognized subspecies of African lions apparently overlap in northern parts of East Africa, which is based on the work of Bertola et al., who showed that African lions are divided not just into northern and southern subspecies, but also that these subspecies are divided into different clades, such as snortheastern and southeastern clades within the southern subspecies, which had members that migrated to places where other clades are present to form mixed populations in different parts of Africa. In addition, different results from genetic analyses, such as on lions in Central Africa, show that the division between the northern subspecies isn't always clear, because, for example, though one assessment grouped lions in the northern part of this region, which are supposed to belong to the northern subspecies, separately from lions in Southern Africa, which are supposed to belong to the southern subspecies, another assessment grouped certain lions in northern Central Africa with lions in Southern Africa. This isn't in the main page Lion. Leo1pard (talk) 07:41, 7 November 2018 (UTC); edited 12:36, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

The extra material relevant to genetic mixing between the two subspecies can be summarised on the lion page easily. What specifically else are you saying couldn't be placed elsewhere? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:28, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Casliber, you would refer to certain details that I added to the main article 'overkill', so I wasn't interested in keeping it there. Leo1pard (talk) 12:36, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Where did I say this was overkill? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:03, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Or not 'overkill', my apologies if that was incorrect, but "over the top". Bearing in mind that genetic analyses have been conducted on different populations, including those that used to be treated as subspecies, do you remember what was said about not keeping that much detail in the main article over here, but to leave it in another article, or articles where this is more relevant? Leo1pard (talk) 13:11, 7 November 2018 (UTC)l edited 13:12, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

• Keep We have numerous pages about other types of animal and plant. For example, the nominator has created numerous articles about different varieties of Banksia. There are numerous books about the African lion and so the topic is especially notable – a list of titles follows. Relevant policies include WP:ATD, WP:BITE, WP:NOTPAPER and WP:PRESERVE. Andrew D. (talk) 10:55, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

1. The African Lion
2. Conservation of the African Lion
3. Lions of Africa
4. The Biology of the African Lion
5. In Search of the African Lion
6. Africa's Lions'
7. All about the African Lion
8. African Lions

Andrew, the African lion is 99% synonymous with lion (apart from a tiny Asiatic population). You get that, right? So what would there be that could only go on an African lion page and not lion nor one of the subspecies? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:28, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Casliber, the Cat Specialist Group expressed uncertainty over their classification of subspecies, and it's more to do than just genetic mixing. The fact that the two subspecies share the same continent, and migrate to different parts of it here and there means that the division between the subspecies was shown by genetic analyses like this to be blurry, and you had referred to information that was similar to that as 'overkill'. Leo1pard (talk) 12:36, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

The lion page is quite broad in scope and, at over 100K, is arguably too large and in need of splitting. Lions once roamed all over the world and so there seems to be plenty of scope to discuss them in a geographical and historical context – see American lion, for example. Any development or restructuring should be done by ordinary editing per WP:PRESERVE and so AfD is not the place for this per WP:NOTCLEANUP. My !vote stands. Andrew D. (talk) 13:42, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

• Redirect to Lion Both the "keep" !votes above seem to have completely ignored the OP, both being based on discrediting a "lack of notability" argument no one made. This behaviour is disruptive, and should be stopped. Obviously this page should exist as a redirect, disambig page or some such, and my money's on the former, per CL. At the very least, if the current article is kept, the title needs to be changed to Lions in Africa, as the current one is misleading and implies something equivalent to African elephant. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 12:43, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

And WP:BITE is not a policy, does not apply to an article created by someone with more than 18,000 edits, and is far less relevant here than WP:BRD: six months ago Leo1pard (talk · contribs) created a standalone article out of a redirect that had been stable as such for more than 11 years. Additionally, Andrew Davidson (talk · contribs) may be interested to know that Leo1pard unilaterally merged several other previously standalone articles into this one, either without providing attribution (required by Misplaced Pages's copyright policy, with the exception of the few where they were the sole noteworthy author) or by removing the contents from the live version of Misplaced Pages altogether and simply redirecting, which actually runs completely counter to the spirit of WP:PRESERVE. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 12:50, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Hijiri88 It has already been explained that this is a highly WP:Notable topic that has been covered in various WP:Reliable sources and contains a lot of information that would be difficult to merge in other pages, and the article makes it clear that it's not a single species or subspecies, but a genetically diverse group which are recognised as being divided into different clades and subspecies, with the relevant material, so your argument is a case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT, hence disruptive in itself, and as for the issue of attibution, after being talked to about it, I decided to be more careful about that, and I warn that it was after someone else made an article that was similar to existing articles and refused to listen to what was in discussions that this got created, and I had mentioned this in relevant talk-pages. I have been careful to justify in relevant talk-pages about what I do (see this version for example), and that includes what I did here. Leo1pard (talk) 12:54, 7 November 2018 (UTC); edited 13:19, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Your entire response to me was already discredited by my own initial !vote, and actually by Cas Liber's OP comment. Additionally, justifying yourself on the relevant talk pages is no good without broad community consensus, and even with community consensus does not justify the lack of attribution. Nowhere in the page history does it say text was merged from elsewhere on Misplaced Pages. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 13:01, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Wrong, I did become careful about attribution in this article: . Leo1pard (talk) 13:11, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

What about the text written by Altaileopard (talk · contribs), Troodon58 (talk · contribs) et al. at Southwest African lion and Transvaal lion, or Bhagyamani at Ethiopian lion and East-Southern African lion? Was that text just removed from the encyclopedia when you redirected the pages? Andrew Davidson might have something to say about that, since this is a rare case when the editor with the "deletionist" position is the one arguing to keep the article currently at AFD. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 13:28, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

• AfD debates (Science and technology)
• AfD debates