Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Methuselah (tree)

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 of the debate was Keep Eluchil404 10:57, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Methuselah_(tree)

the issue of oldest organism is highly debated and this is by no means the best or only candidate,should be merged with a more general article.Rodrigue 20:59, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

• This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. (Liberatore, 2006) 12:38, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

• Keep subject of the article is notable regardless if it actually is the oldest organism or not. Ydam 12:52, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Ydam. JPD (talk) 12:57, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep, is certainly notable Optimale ^Gu 14:33, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, highly notable. Jumbo Snails 19:08, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, highly notable. --Coredesat 23:29, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as per above Scented Guano 05:07, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Existing organisms are notable by default. And even if this should've been merged, then it wouldn't have required an AFD. - Mgm|^(talk) 07:56, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Whether or not it is the oldest doesn't matter, it's still notable. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 21:49, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and expand... I was hoping to see more information on this particular tree. --plicease 07:41, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep. If this is not an encylopedic entry then one wonders what it takes to be included! Vegaswikian 22:30, 25 June 2006 (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.