"Delete: The families are already identified on the page. If information/description is wanted about a particular family it should go on the individual family page (i.e. ). There is no need for this category - not to mention that it would really involve adding 19-20 categories and categorizing a few hundred families. --Gahoo 09:34, 17 April 2007 (EDT) Delete: Per above. I was gonna mark this yesterday when it was empty, but I wanted to see where she was going with it. --Charitwo 14:30, 17 April 2007 (EDT) Delete: Per above, but I think the bestiary page or something should give a little info. about each of the \"ecosystems.\" For example, something to put in a description for beasts would be \"A general rule of thumb to define beasts is that they are usually mammals that are not flying.\" or something. --Joped 16:18, 17 April 2007 (EDT) Keep: Well, thought it over for all the reasons above before creating this. But I keep thinking, why not? Because there's sets for all other types of monster classes anyway. Beastmen, Birds, Amophs, etc. This also falls into the category of monster classification in the Beast Strength Chart. People would see which monsters their Beast Killer traits would take affect on and such. Thought of filling in the information of each beast type based on their family as in the page. I'll try to put down a few examples on this page. --Goddess 22:03, 17 April 2007 (EDT) Comment: Keep editing, lets see where you're going with this. --Chrisjander 22:24, 17 April 2007 (EDT) Delete: Abandoned and also seems useless even if completed. --Gahoo 09:51, 9 May 2007 (CDT) Delete: Per Gahoo, and Beast Strength Chart already provides a good reference to each category. Rylan 20:26, 21 May 2007 (CDT) Resolution: Delete. This article has not been expanded in 19 days and is not in use. It provides no useful information. -- 15:33, 28 May 2007 (CDT)"@en . "FFXIclopedia:AfD Discussions/Category:Beasts"@en . . "Delete: The families are already identified on the page. If information/description is wanted about a particular family it should go on the individual family page (i.e. ). There is no need for this category - not to mention that it would really involve adding 19-20 categories and categorizing a few hundred families. --Gahoo 09:34, 17 April 2007 (EDT) Delete: Per above. I was gonna mark this yesterday when it was empty, but I wanted to see where she was going with it. --Charitwo 14:30, 17 April 2007 (EDT) Delete: Abandoned and also seems useless even if completed. --Gahoo 09:51, 9 May 2007 (CDT)"@en . .