Deletion of Birds of the Indiana Dunes

Comment: per postdlf, notability means mainly whether enough RS material exists to write a substantial article. In this case it clearly does. Notability doesn't mean "I'm interested" or "of general interest". The nonexistence of similar articles that could be written is irrelevant (). Also list articles have advantages of their own that normal articles don't have (e.g. navigation ). It could be merged to the two articles that link to it (), but it's too large for that (). From a policy standpoint, seems like the best thing is just to keep it. –&nbsp
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST||WP:AOAL||WP:LINKED||WP:ARTICLESIZE)

Comment: The article already shows that there are at least two books entirely about just this specific topic (http://www.amazon.com/Birds-Indiana-Dunes-Midland-Book/dp/0253203694/ref=pd_sim_b_1?ie=UTF8&refRID=15T98YE1HH6F599KCEB7 including one from a university press, no less). And page 12 of https://books.google.com/books?id=2DhYTD5iFNsC&pg=PA12&dq=birds+of+the+indiana+dunes&hl=en&sa=X&ei=g_-aVNv7Lc-vyATwsYCoAw&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=birds%20of%20the%20indiana%20dunes&f=false this source lists more than half a dozen journal articles also just about birds of the Indiana Dunes (as can clearly be seen from the titles listed there). I found a book about the Indiana Dunes that also discusses its birds in depth,https://books.google.com/books?ei=4v6aVIioLMmHyATin4GYAw&id=MAEKAQAAMAAJ&dq=dune+country&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=birds and even if all of that were not enough I would expect other books on the region/parks to do the same. So discounting the clearly incorrect ipse dixit "I would say this is not notable", I'm not seeing anything left on the deletion side except  or "I'm not personally interested in this
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST)