Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MV Global Mercy


 * 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 keep. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 20:01, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

MV Global Mercy

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Incompetent deprod by Andrew Davidson. Original prod reason by Strikerforce still stands, Article creation on this subject is too soon. &raquo; Shadowowl  &#124;  talk  13:51, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Malta-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:25, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:25, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep WP:TOOSOON is an essay not policy nor guideline. And it talks mainly about movies and biographies while the topic here is a ship.  It is a substantial vessel and was launched earlier this year.  While it is still being fitted out, it's a big project which takes time to complete like HMS Queen Elizabeth (R08) or Crossrail.  Deleting it so that we can recreate it later would be a waste of time, like this vexatious nomination. Andrew D. (talk) 22:23, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment From TOOSOON, For an article to be created, its subject should be verifiably notable due to its discussion in sufficient independent secondary reliable sources. Sometimes, a topic may appear obviously notable to you, but there may not be enough independent coverage of it to confirm that. In such cases, it may simply be too soon to create the article. This applies to... new products and any other topics about which facts have only recently emerged or are still emerging. (Emphasis added by me) So, our question is, is this ship a "new product", since it itself did not previously exist? Some may see that as a stretch, but I feel that it's a literal interpretation and is correct, which is why I originally applied TOOSOON in tagging the article PROD. However, established precedent for articles such as this shows that the "fitting out" stage is not necessarily too soon to create an article about a vessel of this size. So, recognizing that while disagreeing with it personally, I will remain neutral on this discussion. Striker force Talk 16:05, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:47, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is not a proposed project that may never come to anything. This is a major ship, that is already at sea with the name on the side in huge letters.  It is still being fitted out but nevertheless is attracting coverage.. It's not TOOSOON, rather, the nomination is TOOLATE. SpinningSpark 10:00, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Just FYI, the ref shows the 3D rendering of the ship, this is not an actual photo ;-). But I agree with the rest.Omgwtfbbqsomethingrandom (talk) 01:48, 1 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. This is not WP:TOOSOON, the ship is being actively constructed.Omgwtfbbqsomethingrandom (talk) 01:48, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, it takes 5-10 years to design and build a ship, this is almost complete and has zero possibility of being cancelled given the millions already spent. Szzuk (talk) 17:20, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. Deprodding was correct. This is not a case of WP:TOOSOON. Bharatiya  29  14:09, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, per arguments above regarding where we are in the process, since that's the argument for deletion, rather than the ship not being notable. /Julle (talk) 01:58, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep - This is not WP:TOOSOONBabbaQ (talk) 16:55, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, big ship, has sources, meets WP:GNG, not WP:TOOSOON. Coolabahapple (talk) 23:12, 4 October 2018 (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.