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 redirect‎ to List of virus genera. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:20, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of virus species (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Potential violation of WP:NOTDIRECTORY or WP:NOTDATABASE. The article is extremely long and continually loses utility as more virus species adopt binomial nomenclature. Updating the article has become infeasible due to the massive number of species. A similar discussion was held at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of mammal species and was resolved by redirecting to the genus article, but the article List of virus genera has most of the same issues as this one. A past discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of viruses voted to keep this article but the circumstances surrounding the article have greatly devalued the worth of this list since then. Velayinosu (talk) 02:03, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Biology and Organisms. Velayinosu (talk) 02:03, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to list of virus genera, as we did with mammal species. I don't buy that virus genera is too unwieldy, it's not that long. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 04:09, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:23, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to List of virus genera; this is exactly parallel to the List of mammal species case, only worse in practice (as the number of virus species is presumed to be much larger). There's no benefit in an alphabetical omnibus list when we have rationally organized sub-lists. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 08:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - List of virus genera is just as useless. Graham Beards (talk) 16:44, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to List of virus genera as mentioned above, I don't see the need to delete it. --SimmeD (talk) 20:15, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to List of virus genera; we should wait and see if improvements can be made to the one for genera (like in List of mammal genera), but if it seems that it is also becoming useless, it can be deleted in another AfD. _>>> Webclo^udd@their-talk-page 04:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect This list is not needed. Having the List of virus genera is definitely a better approach. My very best wishes (talk) 02:34, 7 January 2025 (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.