Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Palm Beach Ferry


 * 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. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 20:30, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Palm Beach Ferry

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )


 * Delete. Non-notable business. Wikipedia is not Wikitravel. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 23:33, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 23:08, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 23:08, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 23:08, 31 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete, no indication of notability, and the news coverage of the indicated incident appears to be routine and nothing that imparts notability. -- Kinu  t/c 23:15, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep or Merge with full content The world at large has taken notice of this public sector institution, see Google images ["Palm Beach ferry" Sydney OR Australia].  As per WP:CORP, the topic "attracts attention".  As per www.ferriesofsydney.com, "Within a year of colonisation, Sydney's first ferry was built & launched.", the point being that the ferries of Sydney have a long and rich history.  The argument of "Wikitravel" is not cited, so we are left to decide if this is somehow related to WP:NOT.  If so, what criteria tells us that this is a travel topic that is excluded on Wikipedia?  Notability is a test that decides if we want to have a stand-alone article, and only leads under our WP:Deletion policy and WP:N notability guideline to deletion in limited cases.  One of the WP:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion is merger, the WP:BEFORE analysis of which is notably absent in the nomination.  There are ways this article could be merged without removing any content if the objection is that the topic is not WP:N notable.  Unscintillating (talk) 02:22, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I can see no evidence that this company is in the public sector. What basis do you have for that assertion? Phil Bridger (talk) 17:13, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Here are some references:
 * International
 * Australian national
 * Ferry transport in Queensland, in another Australian state
 * NSW ferry regulations
 * NSW ferry safety
 * Unscintillating (talk) 00:17, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * do any of these qualify as coverage of Palm Beach Ferry?LibStar (talk) 04:17, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * In the post preceding the list of references, User:Phil Bridger asked for evidence that this company is in the public sector, that is why these references are listed. Unscintillating (talk) 18:13, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * But how can sources that don't mention this company be evidence of its ownership status? Phil Bridger (talk) 18:32, 2 June 2012 (UTC)


 * ??? None of those even seems to mention this company, let alone say that it is publicly owned. I presume, since you linked the phrase above, that you know what "public sector" means? Phil Bridger (talk) 08:36, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a battleground. Unscintillating (talk) 18:13, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * And I'm not treating it as a battleground. I simply asked for your evidence that this was a public sector company, as I hadn't been able to find any such sources and thought you might have found some better ones with significant coverage of the company. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:32, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I still haven't heard a compelling argument why the distinction between public and private is relevant p  b  p  19:57, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't think that it is relevant, but was hoping that Unscintillating would reveal what sources were used to determine that this company is in the public sector, as those sources, if they exist, could also be useful for determining notability. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:37, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Unscintillating, how do the above list of sources which say nothing about Palm beach ferry advance notability? I also think "Within a year of colonisation, Sydney's first ferry was built & launched" is totally irrelevant. Palm Beach ferry was not created 200 years ago. and the my local taxi company offers public services, does that make it notable? no. it's got nothing to do with battleground, editors have asked for clarification and you haven't actually argued notability. LibStar (talk) 08:21, 4 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Palm Beach, New South Wales. I cannot find coverage to establish notability.  The bets source for establishing notability that I was able to find is this one.  That people take snapshots of ferries and they turn up on a Google image search does not establish notability, nor does that fact the Sydney has had a lot ferries provide for any sort of automatic notability.  I'm open to keeping this article if sources can be presented, but they would have to be much better than the results from a google image search. -- Whpq (talk) 16:28, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete: Not seeing a compelling argument for keeping, nor how public vs. private sector has any bearing on notability p  b  p  00:59, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep all middle schools are notable since they have multiple sources written about them, everyone I've ever been to has dozens of articles in various papers covering the school in depth which makes them meet the GNG and therefore all schools are notable. Whoops, well in any cases all ferries are notable, they get written about in the paper and like subway lines are important infrastructure topics of broad interest to readers. Also the vote beneath this one is irrelevant.LuciferWildCat (talk) 01:17, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * above vote is irrelevant. LibStar (talk) 04:17, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * It wouldn't be if the ferry contained a middle school! --kelapstick(bainuu) 05:23, 2 June 2012 (UTC)


 * delete fails WP:CORP. Palm beach ferry has the same status as a small bus or taxi company that provides public services. Most of the small operators around the world would not qualify for a WP article. Unscintillating's arguments of public entity are irrelevant, No in-depth numerous sources are about this small company. LibStar (talk) 04:17, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete (there is no verified, relevant content) and leave a redirect. Drmies (talk) 15:54, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:CORP. No evidence of "significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources" found in given refs or independent search. --Tgeairn (talk) 17:54, 7 June 2012 (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.