Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Japanese minelayer Itsukushima: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 10:17, 6 October 2008

Japanese minelayer Itsukushima

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Little content. There are 5 tags on it, and I don't really sense any notability. Pretty much per WP:CSD, I could probably speedy it but I'd rather bring it here. — Ceran thor [Formerly] LordSunday] 19:00, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

for God's sake i have only started to work on this article today, obviously i'll expand it in the following days.Loosmark (talk) 19:53, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 21:35, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 21:36, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep as it was just barely created. There's no WP:TIMELINE on Wikipedia, and it shows an amazing lack of WP:AGF to nominate it for deletion so soon after creation without attempting to work with the creator first. Additionally, notability is claimed in the article as the ship is apparently the first diesel-only warship in the Imperial Japanese Navy. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 22:04, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep Give the creator some time to work on it. --Woland (talk) 22:22, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. While this certainly needs improvement and expansion (it was me that tagged it with a number of maintenance templates), deletion is not a fair option just yet. For the record, speedy deletion is not applicable here, as notability is at least asserted. --DAJF (talk) 00:12, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I think I found the Japanese article: 厳島 (敷設艦). Some of the numbers don't quite match up, but it says it was a minelayer. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 02:38, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Commissioned naval ships are considered inherently notable. Benea (talk) 10:17, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 02:38, 6 October 2008 edit Nihonjoe (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, Template editors 123,508 edits JAWP article ← Previous edit		Revision as of 10:17, 6 October 2008 edit undo Benea (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 32,665 edits keep Next edit →
Line 15:		Line 15:

	*'''Comment''': I think I found the Japanese article: [[:ja:厳島 (敷設艦)\|厳島 (敷設艦)]]. Some of the numbers don't quite match up, but it says it was a minelayer. ···[[User:Nihonjoe\|<font color="green">日本穣</font>]]<sup>[[Help:Japanese\|?]] · <small>[[User talk:Nihonjoe\|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</sup></small> 02:38, 6 October 2008 (UTC)		*'''Comment''': I think I found the Japanese article: [[:ja:厳島 (敷設艦)\|厳島 (敷設艦)]]. Some of the numbers don't quite match up, but it says it was a minelayer. ···[[User:Nihonjoe\|<font color="green">日本穣</font>]]<sup>[[Help:Japanese\|?]] · <small>[[User talk:Nihonjoe\|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</sup></small> 02:38, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

			*'''Keep''': Commissioned naval ships are considered inherently notable. [[User:Benea\|Benea]] ([[User talk:Benea\|talk]]) 10:17, 6 October 2008 (UTC)