Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bremerton Marina (2nd nomination)


 * 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   no consensus. Stifle (talk) 08:35, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Bremerton Marina
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Another non-notable marina with info coming from the governing body. Information provided is about its services and nothing that establishes notability. As with the other deleted or deletion in process marinas, there's no evidence this is a notable marina and simple existence is not enough. Note that Articles for deletion/Bremerton Marina was for an article that was substantially different, although the subject is the same marina. TravellingCari 17:09, 2 September 2008 (UTC) 
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.   —• Gene93k (talk) 17:24, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions.   —• Gene93k (talk) 17:24, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. I had previously attempted to have the article speedy deleted under G11 (blatant advertising). Basement12 (T.C) 17:32, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and cleanup. The citations added by Eastmain and additional searching show non-trivial RS interest. This is one of 3 or 4 salvageable marinas from the creator's copy-and-paste spree. • Gene93k (talk) 17:39, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete contains no content worth salvaging. Mayalld (talk) 21:54, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Local coverage does not make this article notable, despite Eastmain's attempts. Where is the significant notability that makes this place stand out? What happened to the company CEO/editor in charge of this marathon edit spree? Flowanda | Talk 07:21, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * keep. There is significant coverage in independent reliable sources. As far as I know that satisfies WP:N and WP:V. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 15:27, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 19:00, 7 September 2008 (UTC)  User:NonvocalScream non-admin closed this as a no consensus, but I felt a relist was better.


 * Weak Keep The article is not written as an advertisment and seems to be informative about this verifiable marina in Bremerton, Washington. I'm on the fence about it's notability but when truely on the fence, err on the side of keep.--Pmedema (talk) 23:33, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Marinas aren't just businesses, they're transportation facilities. They exist in the real world and are referenced in various reliable sources. Jclemens (talk) 07:05, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment where are these sources? The article is "sourced" entirely from the gov't website. Real world existence !=notability. This article has already been deleted once, as have the vast majority of the other creations from this author. I see nothing demonstrating notability. TravellingCari  16:23, 8 September 2008 (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.