Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liver (1786 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 merge to List of slave ships. As an ATD. Liz Read! Talk! 08:03, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Liver (1786 ship)

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

No reliable, indepth sources about this ship. All we have are primary sources, databases, and extremely passing mentions (the three references given pay no significant attention to the Liver but just include it in long lists or tables). Fram (talk) 08:34, 24 November 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:34, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Transportation,  and England. Fram (talk) 08:34, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge into List of slave ships as an alternative to deletion. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 11:01, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable ship stub based entirely on databases. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 13:39, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete -- Another NN ship. I suppose that merge is an alternative, but there were so many slaving ships that I doubt that the suggested merge target is a useful article to have.  There must have been 1000s of British ships, let along French, Dutch, etc.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:20, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep: WP policy does not require the removal of non-notable articles. There are many articles marked as stubs that lack notability, or even verification, that the community permit to survive, reflecting an inclusionist desire to change Wikipedia only when no knowledge would be lost as a result. Notability is a random outcome of many factors. I am gathering info on a vessel that wrecked about the same time as Liver, with the loss of almost her entire crew of 50 people. The loss occurred on the coast of the United Kingdom, in sight of many people. The loss gave rise to many newspaper articles, with follow-ups as bodies washed ashore. In time a local historian gathered the information and wrote an essay for a book of local history. Liver, by contrast, was captured. Perhaps she will become notable if some historian examining archives finds her (the SlaveVoyages database continues to grow as new archives are discovered), or if someone publishes a paper on captured slave ships. Keeping the article would enable people interested in the slave trade, or Liverpool’s role in it, or some other topic, to learn from it. I have spent much of my life learning and teaching. I therefore give a high priority to facilitating learning. Acad Ronin (talk) 01:01, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * So you agree this isn't notable? Thanks for your delete vote. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 01:01, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete All of the referenced sources are lists and databases involving the subject, with none of them ever proving the significance of the subject. Neither the article nor its creator demonstrated why the subject is notable enough for its own article and how is it different from other numerous slave ships at the same time period. Fails WP:GNG. We can't really run on the expectation that "someday the subject might be notable", otherwise the sites will just be flooded by articles on average people and everyday items. Recreate this article when some historian finally found the time to research and publish about the ship, I guess. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 21:08, 7 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.