Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vulgaris

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 delete. Singularity 01:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vulgaris

Vulgaris (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

This page is proposed for deletion for the same reasons that pertain to pages Miserabilis and Canus. Treats biological species by species epithet only, rather than binomial -- Wloveral (talk) 00:27, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

• Delete "vulgaris" is Latin usually translated as "common", whence English "vulgar", and Vulgate, etc. Little different than a dab for common that would contain the non-Latin names of various species called the "common ..." not meaningful. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 01:03, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
• Delete for the reasons I've already expressed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miserabilis‎ and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Canus‎. Someone needs to tell User:Neelix to stop creating these until his basic (and I believe erroneous) rationale is resolved. This is approaching a WP:POINT violation. Deor (talk) 03:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:41, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Until the creator can provide a reliable journal article that says species epithet are used as a standalone term. Also suggest to nom to notify WP:BIOLOGY, maybe they can help sort this problem.--Lenticel ^(talk) 05:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. It's not uncommon for species in specialized literature to be referred to as "X. species", where X. is the first letter of the genus name and species is the species name (cf. "T. rex", "D. melanogaster"), but this would suggest that it would be useful to have a DAB page for, e.g., S. vulgaris or B. vulgaris, but not for "vulgaris" alone. Doing it this way seems to violate WP:DAB#Partial title matches. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 07:49, 28 May 2008 (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.