Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/S/s Helsingfors

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The result was Withdrawn by nominator.. Original statement and timestamp:- The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) IM3847 (talk) 10:57, 6 November 2017 (UTC), has had to be re-closed owing to a formatting break with original closure. (non-admin closure) Nightfury 11:55, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

S/s Helsingfors[edit]

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

This does not meet Notability guideliness as per WP:NN IM3847 (talk) 07:30, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Unreferenced, fails WP:V, also little indication of notability per nom. Still, on second thought, this may be notable since it was involved in an accident that had fatalities. Maybe someone can find sources? My quick search only turned few things in Finnish that I am not fluent in :( --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:51, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- It took five seconds to determine that WP:V is satisfied, with multiple mentions of the wreck. Now, WP:RS is what is needed, which is difficult as there appears to have been a later ship (1950s) by the same name. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 12:13, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - Changing my vote to keep. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:37, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    - Looking back, I may have come across a bit strongly in my reply above, so my apologies for that. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 09:59, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 12:14, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Enough info found to satisfy V and GNG. Mjroots (talk) 20:27, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Excellent work by Jussi Karlgren and Mjroots has established this as a notable ship, and the article is now clear and comfortably formatted and referenced. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:05, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — As per above, the vessel has been established to be notable enough to warrant an individual article. Tupsumato (talk) 09:26, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As per above passes WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 10:45, 6 November 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.