Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Type C6 ship

: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. WP:SNOW The Bushranger One ping only 21:31, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

=[[Type C6 ship]]=

:{{la|Type C6 ship}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Type C6 ship}})

Delete for WP:Notability

Delete for WP:Notablity. Standard constuction of the day that had no influence on future designs. None of the vessels had a service career or incident that would rise to the level of a stand-alone article. Much of the inline citations refer to different vessel lists from the same web site. While the author has done considerable research in good faith other articles from this editor all lack the comprehensive criteria of B class.Mariepr (talk) 03:02, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Nick-D (talk) 09:36, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

  • Keep The level of sourcing looks sufficient to meet WP:N to me (and yes, I have checked the sources). Nick-D (talk) 09:36, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep no notability problem here; standard ship class article, and especially notable due to use as Maritime Prepositioning Force crane ships. Buckshot06 (talk) 09:43, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep WP:notable & enclyclopedic. Reasons given in nom are not wiki-reasons for deletion. North8000 (talk) 12:20, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep, as notable as the Hog Islanders, Type C1 ships, Type C2 ships, Type T2 tankers and many other ship classes. WP:GNG has been met and passed. Mjroots (talk) 18:29, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep as per all the other comments. But can I ask what's going on here? You are the original creator Mariepr, and now you've nominated it for deletion, with the cryptic comment 'other articles from this editor [i.e. you] all lack the comprehensive criteria of B class.' Is this comment, and hence this afd, a reference to User:Brad101 rating it as start class? Or is there something else? Benea (talk) 20:22, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

: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.