Deletion of List of animals with hymens

Comment: Supports the hymen article.  Seems to satisfy  (except a lead should be added).  Lack of references is not a valid reason for deletion unless there is reason to believe the article can never be sourced, which is not the case here as any anatomy book for any species listed should be able to confirm or deny the claim that the species has a hymen.  A lead should be added to the article to provide context as suggested by Tallard, but that's a reason to improve the article, not a rationale for deletion.  Regarding Tallard's other arguments, list articles are as valid as any other wikipedia articles, and are validated by the same criteria; and there's no need for linked articles to mention these animals' hymens, any more than it's necessary for articles linked by List of animals displaying homosexual behavior to mention the homosexual behavior of those animals, because the subject may be notable in the parent article but not in the articles it links to
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Lists (WP:LIST)

Comment: with hymen. The list is short enough to be merged, and contains no context or anything else to suggest why this is notable enough to justify a breakout list. If this had dozens of items, I might consider differently, although with dozens of items it might have become even less notable. I have no objection to the sourcing; The Straight Dope is an internationally-syndicated column and it's a violation of  to disqualify it simply because of a perception of the type of column it is. Also, the writer of the column got the information from ''somewhere
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV)