Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rosa 'Botticelli'

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:22, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rosa 'Botticelli' (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)

No claim of notability for one of the dozens of rose varieties introduced each year. Searching is inhibited by the artist and by the innumerable places that want to sell you a bush, and by other exhaustive listings of rose varieties, but I saw nothing to indicate that this is anything other than a run-of-the-mill floribunda. Mangoe (talk) 20:03, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Biology-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:35, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am adding a non-award winning, but commercially popular rose to an existing notable rose breeder page to demonstrate a selection of rose cultivars created by the rose breeder. I do understand that by itself this is not a notable rose. If it is decided to delete the article, in the future I will plan to only create new rose articles that have won a prestigious annual rose award. MauraWen (talk) 21:21, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom and Redirect to rose.--Darwinek (talk) 22:34, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete without redirecting to rose. The sourcing is inadequate to support a claim that this is a notable variety. There are literally tens, possibly hundreds of thousands of varieties/cultivars of roses. It is an unlikely search term on its own, and since it is not mentioned (and should not be mentioned) at the main "rose" article, the redirect is of no use to anyone anyway. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:11, 22 July 2022 (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.