Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Future ship project 21


 * 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  12:00, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Future ship project 21

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

Unsourced sub-draft quality stub, barely improved since 2012. Dronebogus (talk) 05:16, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:43, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. –LaundryPizza03 ( d  c̄ ) 06:41, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Only two Google news search results appear. One from January 17, 2012  about the proposed Future Ship Project 21st Century.  The other search result  is hidden behind a paywall.  So it was never made and got little attention even as a suggestion.   D r e a m Focus  08:42, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * It received attention. Not quite the attention that was desired.
 * Apparently someone named "Blunkett" liked the idea, according to its proponent at least, when it was renamed from "Cadland" to "FSP21". But there's also a record of rejection going back to the 1990s, according to the same proponent.
 * Uncle G (talk) 11:07, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - At best this is is a case of TOOSOON. An article on a ship that might be built which has little notable coverage seems pointless and not encyclopaedic. Dunarc (talk) 22:03, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. If a new royal yacht is completed it obviously will have and deserve its own article, but not now, and certainly not an article as low-quality as this one.  RobinCarmody (talk) 00:22, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Apparently someone named "Blunkett" liked the idea, according to its proponent at least, when it was renamed from "Cadland" to "FSP21". But there's also a record of rejection going back to the 1990s, according to the same proponent.
 * Uncle G (talk) 11:07, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - At best this is is a case of TOOSOON. An article on a ship that might be built which has little notable coverage seems pointless and not encyclopaedic. Dunarc (talk) 22:03, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. If a new royal yacht is completed it obviously will have and deserve its own article, but not now, and certainly not an article as low-quality as this one.  RobinCarmody (talk) 00:22, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. If a new royal yacht is completed it obviously will have and deserve its own article, but not now, and certainly not an article as low-quality as this one.  RobinCarmody (talk) 00:22, 19 March 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.