- 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 delete. Consensus is that sourcing is insufficient. Star Mississippi 16:01, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- SS Gifu Maru ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable ship. Its only claim to significance is that it was sunk by a U.S. submarine during WW2. The author added sources after I tagged it for notability, but none of them give significant coverage. The source where the photos came from only says "This ship is possibly Gifu Maru". There are no sources here that are reliable, independent, and give significant coverage. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 23:19, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Japan. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 23:19, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
Goodday, I hope I'm doing this right as I'm basing this on the instructions that were left on my talk page. I indeed added more sources to my article because I believed that the problem relied on the low amount of sources I provided, but now I've been informed that they weren't up to par with the quality that wikipedia is looking for. So I wondered if there was any way the article could be saved from deletion. Would you perhaps have any suggestions for me? And in case the issue can't be solved, then I can not bring any objections to the page's deletion. No matter how sad that will be. Thank you in advance for the reply, and for leaving me a notice on my talk page about the page's situation. Have a good day. Indylover2010 ( talk) 05:27, 26 November 2022 (CET)
- Keep - article has been expanded and give structure, which should be enough to overcome concerns raised when nominating for deletion. Mjroots ( talk) 18:09, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- I regrettably can't agree. You've added two citations to Lloyd's Register. While they verifiably show this ship existed, they do not make a difference as far as significant coverage is concerned. I do not see a GNG pass here still. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 18:18, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp ( talk) 13:51, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: None of the sources constitute significant coverage needed to establish notability. Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 01:41, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete fails WP:GNG. One of 2,100+ Japanese merchant ships sunk in the Pacific War. Sources provided are either not RS or just confirm its existence and sinking. All detail can be covered in 1-2 sentences on the USS Seawolf (SS-197) page. Mztourist ( talk) 05:14, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:46, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep passes
WP:GNG we have RS and it does not matter how many ships were sunk, if they are notable they get an article in the encyclopedia. The project is made better with the inclusion of this article.
Lightburst (
talk)
02:23, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
- Passes GNG how, exactly? None of the reliable, independent, secondary sources give significant coverage. Lloyd's register is a database and only gives barebones information, and cannot be considered significant coverage. laststandonzombieisland.com is SPS, and esssentially everything else is brief mentions of the sinking as a small part of Seawolf's career. DANFS gives all of seven words to the Gifu Maru. "The project is made better with the inclusion of this article" is your personal opinion, and not based in any sort of guideline or policy. This reeks of a drive-by vote with no attention to the actual state of sourcing in the article, which I checked thoroughly before nominating. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 02:29, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Lacks in-depth coverage to meet WP:GNG. MrsSnoozyTurtle 07:40, 10 December 2022 (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 delete. Consensus is that sourcing is insufficient. Star Mississippi 16:01, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- SS Gifu Maru ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable ship. Its only claim to significance is that it was sunk by a U.S. submarine during WW2. The author added sources after I tagged it for notability, but none of them give significant coverage. The source where the photos came from only says "This ship is possibly Gifu Maru". There are no sources here that are reliable, independent, and give significant coverage. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 23:19, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Japan. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 23:19, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
Goodday, I hope I'm doing this right as I'm basing this on the instructions that were left on my talk page. I indeed added more sources to my article because I believed that the problem relied on the low amount of sources I provided, but now I've been informed that they weren't up to par with the quality that wikipedia is looking for. So I wondered if there was any way the article could be saved from deletion. Would you perhaps have any suggestions for me? And in case the issue can't be solved, then I can not bring any objections to the page's deletion. No matter how sad that will be. Thank you in advance for the reply, and for leaving me a notice on my talk page about the page's situation. Have a good day. Indylover2010 ( talk) 05:27, 26 November 2022 (CET)
- Keep - article has been expanded and give structure, which should be enough to overcome concerns raised when nominating for deletion. Mjroots ( talk) 18:09, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- I regrettably can't agree. You've added two citations to Lloyd's Register. While they verifiably show this ship existed, they do not make a difference as far as significant coverage is concerned. I do not see a GNG pass here still. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 18:18, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp ( talk) 13:51, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: None of the sources constitute significant coverage needed to establish notability. Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 01:41, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete fails WP:GNG. One of 2,100+ Japanese merchant ships sunk in the Pacific War. Sources provided are either not RS or just confirm its existence and sinking. All detail can be covered in 1-2 sentences on the USS Seawolf (SS-197) page. Mztourist ( talk) 05:14, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:46, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep passes
WP:GNG we have RS and it does not matter how many ships were sunk, if they are notable they get an article in the encyclopedia. The project is made better with the inclusion of this article.
Lightburst (
talk)
02:23, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
- Passes GNG how, exactly? None of the reliable, independent, secondary sources give significant coverage. Lloyd's register is a database and only gives barebones information, and cannot be considered significant coverage. laststandonzombieisland.com is SPS, and esssentially everything else is brief mentions of the sinking as a small part of Seawolf's career. DANFS gives all of seven words to the Gifu Maru. "The project is made better with the inclusion of this article" is your personal opinion, and not based in any sort of guideline or policy. This reeks of a drive-by vote with no attention to the actual state of sourcing in the article, which I checked thoroughly before nominating. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 02:29, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Lacks in-depth coverage to meet WP:GNG. MrsSnoozyTurtle 07:40, 10 December 2022 (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.