Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tin Can Sailors


 * 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 of the debate was KEEP. I withdraw my nomination due to the complete rewrite of the article, which has brought it up to Wikipedia standards. rom a rin [talk to her ] 17:41, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Tin Can Sailors
This article was proposed for deletion (prod) and un-done by the author. Though this topic probably merits an article, this is not it. It is badly written, the grammar and punctuation are incorrect, it is not wikified, does not provide sources, and in general it does not read as an encyclopedia article should. Aside from being tagged with various templates, only one editor has ever worked on it, leading me to question its notability. rom a rin [talk to her ] 04:24, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable naval event. There's a fairly popular book entitled Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors with the whole story.  Needs cleanup and expansion, not deletion. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  04:28, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah I saw a lot about fiction, but no reliable sources. Do you know of any? Iron C hris |  (talk) 04:34, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Try this site, with info not only on the book (which isn't fiction) but also a History Channel documentary based on the book, with interviews of veterans who survived it. If that isn't a reliable source, then I don't know what is. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  04:43, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok that looks like a good source. However, as I point out in my comment below, the title is wrong. Maybe it should be moved to The Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors (which is specific to this particular battle), it could then also mention the book about it. Iron C hris |  (talk) 04:53, 21 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete pn; grammar and punctuation are very bad, the article is POV and unwikified. Nothing has been done to improve it in weeks despite the tags. I'm not even sure about notability as I could not find any reliable sources about this on the web (besides quite a lot of fiction). Iron C hris |  (talk) 04:33, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * What's more "tin can sailors" just means sailors on a destroyer, it is not the name of a given naval battle (the title of the article is therefore highly inapropriate). There were many destroyers during WWII, and therefore many tin can sailors were involved in many battles (a few examples here). I don't even know which battle this refers to, as there aren't any dates! The article would therefore need to be moved to a better title to be understandable, but considering the poor quality of its content it is surely best to create a brand new article under the correct title. Iron C hris |  (talk) 04:53, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, move, and dramatically cleanup, possibly by nominating it for WP:COTW. No matter how bad an article is, if all its faults are in things like POV and grammar, but the topic itself is notable and encyclopedic, it probably shouldn't be deleted. Morgan Wick 06:41, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. I change my vote, the rewrite looks fine now. Good job Tyrenius. Iron C hris |  (talk) 17:20, 21 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep, move, and dramatically clean up. I agree with Morgan Wick; the article as it stands is awful, but the subject warrants an article.  Pastafarian Nights 15:31, 21 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Please note I have rewritten this article stub from scratch. The preceding comments were about the former version. The nom may wish to withdraw the AfD in the light of this. Tyrenius 15:45, 21 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Good job, Tyrenius, rewriting the article; thank you for taking the innitiative. I am withdrawing my nomination for deletion. rom a rin[[image:Rosemary white bg.jpg|15 px]] [talk to her ] 17:23, 21 May 2006 (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.