Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of elephants in Europe

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 keep‎. Consensus is to Keep this article but I really hope the editors advocating Keep can work on improving it with more inline citations. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:47, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

History of elephants in Europe

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

most of the article is an indiscriminate list of historical occurrences where elephants might have been involved. ltb d l (talk) 08:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. ltb d l (talk) 08:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal and Europe. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like a potentially valid topic. Deletion is not cleanup. Is there a reason this page must go? Srnec (talk) 00:43, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I can't see an issue. It's a valid article about recorded instances of exotic animals turning up in an area to which they're not native in pre-modern times. As long as it's sourced that's fine. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:23, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
it's not sourced. did you read the article? ltb d l (talk) 02:00, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Have you looked at the sources in the subsection helpfully named "Sources"? Cortador (talk) 07:56, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. Article is decently sourced, so I don't get why the nom is claiming that it isn't. Seems fine to keep as is in my opinion. CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:30, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
have i gone mad? are we reading the same article? ltb d l (talk) 09:33, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:55, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It's a topic that can be covered encyclopedically, and the quality of the prose and sourcing are WP:SURMOUNTABLE problems. The article is nowhere near WP:TNT territory. Additional sources could include Elephant Trails: A History of Animals and Cultures, Menagerie: The History of Exotic Animals in England, Animals and War: Studies of Europe and North America, and The Culture of Animals in Antiquity: A Sourcebook with Commentaries. Jfire (talk) 05:35, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Necrothesp. Inline citations would be a big improvement but there’s no doubt the topic is covered in RIS. Mccapra (talk) 05:47, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article needs work and especially in-line citations, but as usual, AfD isn't cleanup, and the topic itself is notable. Cortador (talk) 07:58, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.