Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of United States Navy supercarrier commanders


 * 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. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 04:45, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

List of United States Navy supercarrier commanders

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Long term incomplete, orphaned, unsourced article with information that to the degree it is relevant to an encyclopedia, belongs in the entry for each individual ship. Carolina wren (talk) 17:14, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  —Carolina wren (talk) 17:25, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.  —Carolina wren (talk) 17:25, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  —Carolina wren (talk) 17:25, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: even if we decide that this list isn't indescriminate, the information would better belong at the article for the specific ship.  bahamut0013  words deeds 19:01, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - I changed the name of the article a few weeks ago, as before even it was inaccurate. There is no indication that this is a proper topic for a list, not to mention how poor a shape it is in. かんぱい！ Scapler (talk) 20:18, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete A list of commanders would be trivial for each ship, and a combined list for all the carriers isn't encyclopedic Nick-D (talk) 02:26, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Not conceivably indiscriminate, for each of them is inherently notable. Of course it belongs in the articles for the individual ships, but it is also helpful to have it in a summary list. We're not paper, and can duplicate a list of names in different ways of organizing the information.  DGG ( talk ) 04:41, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Reply It's a maintenance hassle, and there is no precise definition of the term supercarrier, tho judging by the list of ships mentioned, the original author meant a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, but the definition can be different than that as that article can attest. Carolina wren (talk) 04:39, 25 May 2010 (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.