Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jean Street Shipyard
: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 keep. Nomination withdrawn – involvement in the civil war is notable. (non-admin closure) Laurdecl talk 20:48, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
=[[:Jean Street Shipyard]]=
:{{la|Jean Street Shipyard}} – (
:({{Find sources AFD|Jean Street Shipyard}})
No claim of importance or notability. WP:ITEXISTS Laurdecl talk 08:19, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
- Keep This shipyard was established in 1843 and so is older than the state of Florida, where it is located. It was the scene of a battle during the civil war, as Confederate blockade runners were based there. See [https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=JbJxCwAAQBAJ&pg=PT44 Egmont Key: A History] for an example of a detailed source. Note that the article is newly created by a new editor who is being bitten rather than assisted. For shame. Andrew D. (talk) 14:58, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
- {{ping|Andrew Davidson}} Are you "shaming" me? This editor has created three blatant copyvios which have since been deleted, edit warred on Shipyard, marked his edits as minor to avoid them being reverted, removed CSD tags on his own articles and has not sourced a single one of his additions to articles, despite being warned repeatedly on his talk page. I haven't been involved in anything other than these AfDs so please don't make false accusations about me biting people. While some of these user's edits may appear constructive we don't know whether or not it is true at all without a source. Laurdecl talk 15:20, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
:::* Please see the steps expected before nominating at AFD. In particular, "Search for additional sources, if the main concern is notability ... If you find that adequate sources do appear to exist, the fact that they are not yet present in the article is not a proper basis for a nomination." Andrew D. (talk) 15:34, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
::::* {{ping|Andrew Davidson}} I didn't nominate this for lack of sources, I nominated it because the article didn't have any credible claim of significance, it merely stated that an old shipyard exists. My grandma's teacup is also old and also exists, should I make an article? Laurdecl talk 15:55, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
- Keep: The article does have a credible claim to significance - per the source that {{u|Andrew Davidson}} identified. I feel that WP:ARTN should be pointed out here. The significance claim is addressed by sources. TheMagikCow (talk) 18:31, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
{{clear}}
: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.