Deletion of Tiger vs lion

Comment: Notability of the topic has been clearly demonstrated. I note that a couple of editors have referred to  above, but without indicating what novel conclusion is being drawn here that is not in the sources. Basing an article on multiple sources is best practice, not original research by synthesis
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH)

Comment: Closing administrator please note, the complete transformation of this article.http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tiger_vs_lion&action=historysubmit&diff=391820385&oldid=391234749 I think there was a little lack of seeing the true  of this article, which is common in deletion discussions. "Delete, merge, or keep articles on topics based on their potential notability and verification, not just how they look now." Sources are reliable and notable. To quote the http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21131 New York Times, "...a lot of good work—verifiable, informative, brain-leapingly strange—is being cast out of this paperless, infinitely expandable accordion folder by people who have a narrow...notion of what sort of curiosity an online encyclopedia will be able to satisfy in the years to come." Thanks
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Potential, not just current state (WP:POTENTIAL)

Comment: per the original research claims given above.  The attempts to scrounge up disparate sources to fix this leaky ship as this AfD has gone on seems to be a bit |problematic as well
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH)