- 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. Cyclopia has found sources and the article is being expanded upon. Withdrawn by nominator. – S. Rich ( talk) 15:32, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Marysburgh vortex
- Marysburgh vortex ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Amazingly, this completely unreferenced article has been classed as B-class. But it does not even have an External links section which might add some uummppfftt to the article. WP:TNT and see if there is anything worth putting together afterwards. – S. Rich ( talk) 07:19, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 01:20, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 01:20, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica 1000 00:14, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Plenty of book sources, thus passes WP:GNG. That article content is not perfect or it is unsourced is a problem dealt by simple editing, not deletion, and per our deletion policy ( WP:TNT is not policy, nor guideline), issues can be solved by editing must be solved by editing, instead of deletion. Note that for WP:GNG, it is sufficient that sources actually are shown to exist, not that the article already contains them.-- cyclopia speak! 14:36, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
- Comment Seems to be a legitimate legend with at least a couple of objective sources showing some notability. I've removed all the cruft propagated by UFO/paranormal/sensational books/websites and original research (i.e. a detailed list of ships, the sinkings of many of them dubiously attributed to the so-called vortex) and stripped it down to a viable stub. - LuckyLouie ( talk) 12:02, 3 September 2014 (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.
- 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. Cyclopia has found sources and the article is being expanded upon. Withdrawn by nominator. – S. Rich ( talk) 15:32, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Marysburgh vortex
- Marysburgh vortex ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Amazingly, this completely unreferenced article has been classed as B-class. But it does not even have an External links section which might add some uummppfftt to the article. WP:TNT and see if there is anything worth putting together afterwards. – S. Rich ( talk) 07:19, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 01:20, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 01:20, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica 1000 00:14, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Plenty of book sources, thus passes WP:GNG. That article content is not perfect or it is unsourced is a problem dealt by simple editing, not deletion, and per our deletion policy ( WP:TNT is not policy, nor guideline), issues can be solved by editing must be solved by editing, instead of deletion. Note that for WP:GNG, it is sufficient that sources actually are shown to exist, not that the article already contains them.-- cyclopia speak! 14:36, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
- Comment Seems to be a legitimate legend with at least a couple of objective sources showing some notability. I've removed all the cruft propagated by UFO/paranormal/sensational books/websites and original research (i.e. a detailed list of ships, the sinkings of many of them dubiously attributed to the so-called vortex) and stripped it down to a viable stub. - LuckyLouie ( talk) 12:02, 3 September 2014 (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.