Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Star (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 redirect to American Cruise Lines. MBisanz ^talk 01:55, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

American Star (ship)[edit]

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

Non-notable ship. I can't find any WP:RS which establish WP:N. There are plenty of mentions in cruise ship industry publications, but those are all essentially directory entries which don't establish notability.

I did find a couple of interesting articles (example: [1]) on a different ship by the same name. It looks like we already cover that in SS America (1939). -- RoySmith (talk) 18:56, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note, some comments below added after the start of the discussion I have indented with blockquote. These comments should not be confused as being part of the nomination, which took place on 18 June 2017; and also, the comments were added after !voting had begun. Unscintillating (talk) 03:27, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[Beginning of text indented with blockquote]

I am also nominating the following related pages because similarly non-notable individual ships in the American Cruise Lines fleet. I would have no objection to a Redirect to American Cruise Lines for all of these. Of the bunch, American Pride (ship) looks like it might have enough sources to justify its own article. Thank you to User:Nordic Nightfury for the redirect suggestion, which led me to the other ships. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:46, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Former American Eagle (ship) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

American Glory (ship) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

American Spirit (ship) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

American Pride (ship) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

[End of text indented with blockquote]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:01, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:01, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong venue, no argument for deletion Notability is not a deletion argument here. See WP:Deletion policy#CONTENT. Unscintillating (talk) 03:57, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to American Cruise Lines. Notability is a suitable argument for deletion. Nördic Nightfury 08:50, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect all -- no need to maintain separate article on these nn ships. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:20, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP ALL Considering IMO numbers are given, it is very easy to verify that the ships exist (American Star). That the articles may need improvement is not a reason to delete. Mjroots (talk) 18:56, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment whatever the case, "Former American Eagle (ship)" is the wrong name for the article. The reasoning used to move the article is spurious. The common name of the ship is "American Eagle" not "Former American Eagle" and any newer ship with the same name does not affect the name of the ship. It used to carry disambiguation American Eagle (ship) but a new ship showed up, so it should have been moved to American Eagle (2000 ship), and not this weird methods used here, since the ship isn't called "Former American Eagle". The new ship used to be located at American Eagle (2015 ship) before that ship was renamed. -- 65.94.169.56 (talk) 04:31, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@65.94.169.56: The naming issues can be sorted later. Those boats confined to rivers general take the form Name ([year] riverboat), whereas ocean going ships would take the form MV name ([year]), with [year] only being used if necessary. Mjroots (talk) 15:48, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

...or, per WP:SHIPNAME, ([MV]) name ([year]), with [MV] only being used if justified by sources as WP:COMMONNAME. Davidships (talk) 22:49, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all'. These are not all the same class or size (Pride is much larger than the others). They are separate vessels, and dealing with them in separate articles is no more difficult than combining them. Kablammo (talk) 17:48, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades^Godric 04:53, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect all - simply because a ship exists does not make it notable. No in-depth coverage from reliable independent sources to show any of them pass WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:16, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.