Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RMS Olympic III


 * 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   G3 by User:Toddst1. (non-admin closure) C T J F 8 3  chat 18:34, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

RMS Olympic III

 * – ( View AfD View log )

None of the sources cited are reliable. I seriously doubt think this is actually happening, but according to the article we will know by the end of the week. Surely there would be a massive flurry of press activity if they were going to start building a replica of the Titanic in the next few days? Beeblebrox (talk) 01:16, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment This is not a pure imagination. You should know in Argentina, that there are shipyard with a lot of billions of money. If you have some week of three, you will see on a website of a shipyard about the Replica Olympic. Only me, and two other people have the reliable source. Maybe this may give a more impression of the Olympic, that has the requirements of SOLAS today. Thanks, Peekarica (talk) 10:21, 5 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions.  —Beeblebrox (talk) 01:20, 5 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete − Per nom. This is just pure speculation, and the expression of someone's over-active imagination. The only majority of sources are to the creator's own webite! — Fly by Night  (  talk  )  01:22, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * There is only TWO urls of my website, rest of it isn't mine. I will be laughing so hard what you will see in Argentina in the end of 2011. Then we see who is right and who has spoken the truth about the return of an Old Reliable. Peekarica (talk) 09:44, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * But there are only three URL's in total. I've changed it to majority instead of all. I hope that deals with your concerns. — Fly by Night  (  talk  )  12:33, 5 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 02:46, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - and delete Replica Titanic too... - The Bushranger Return fire Flank speed 04:33, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete I rather think it is improbable to the point of impossibility that the Royal Mail would use this ship to ship Royal Mail, hence "RMS" is extremely unlikely. Mention anything notable at Olympic class ocean liner 65.94.47.218 (talk) 06:20, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment all these reconstructions of Olympic-class liners should be mentioned in a section at Olympic class ocean liner under "revivals", if they have several RS sources 65.94.47.218 (talk) 06:20, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, there should not be an article on a ship until the keel has been laid at minimum. Mjroots (talk) 10:31, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I totally agree with you, Mjroots. When the keel is laid at minimum, I will come back to make this article again. But the talks about Olympic is starting next week, and then we know if the Olympic is actually coming or not. What is happening next week is the blueprints of Olympic, the updated design of the ship and interior, will be shown to the company which needs a large ship. Someone named Manuel will present the project to the company. If the keel of Olympic will begin, the shipyard (Still not known) will have webcams to view it live. I really believe Olympic makes a chance to be rebuild, since the shipyards in Argentina swimming in the money. Peekarica (talk) 10:43, 5 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete The only source is www.peekarica.com -- if this is being kept secret from the world's press, then it isn't ready for a Wikipedia article.  Mandsford 16:02, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete There are three articles on unlikely re-buildings of Olympic-class ocean liners. We should wait at least until more references referring to the planning and construction of the Olympic III can be provided. Not to mention that the Cunard Line has not even announced a rebuilding of the Olympic and it is unlikely that they would even operate it, not to mention it is unlikely that an Argentine shipyard would build an Olympic III. This is quite possibly a hoax. 1Matt20 (talk) 16:33, 5 December 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.