Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caledonia (1811 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 delete. ✗ plicit  14:39, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Caledonia (1811 ship)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

No evidence found of any notability for this ship. Fram (talk) 11:35, 9 December 2022 (UTC) Relisting comment: Already PROD'd, not eligible for Soft Deletion. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:25, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation, United Kingdom,  and United States of America. Fram (talk) 11:35, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete No real claim to significance, let alone notability. Clear GNG fail. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:15, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Comment: The Caledonia_(ship) article summarises a surprising number of ships of this name in the early 19th century. The present article on this captured ship adds Register information on its operation under this name between 1811 and 1821, but while some significant research effort has clearly gone into distilling such information, does it do any more than describe a commercial ship which was going about its business? I am not seeing specific notability or wider implications of its operation. That said, there have been a number of recent AfDs on individual ships of that era; I wonder if a wider discussion is needed, for example on whether articles on the ownership and operation of those ships which were involved in trading people are more notable than those trading goods? AllyD (talk) 08:32, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I can't find anything in the newspaper archive from 1810-1820 which suggests to me that either a) it wasn't sailing under the name Caledonia (which would maybe make sense as there was a contemporaneous naval ship [HMS Caledonia (1807)]) or b) it just wasn't that important. On balance without seeing a good reason why it is notable, I'd say delete. JMWt (talk) 13:21, 16 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.