Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Victoria Star 2

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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was NO CONSENSUS. — JIP | Talk 17:28, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Victoria Star 2

It is a non-notable 96-foot ferry. -- Kjkolb 00:42, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. --Image:Ottawa flag.png Spinboy 02:22, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Ferries and ships are fairly large objects which have individual variation. I think people interested in ships might be interested in such articles. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:40, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as per Sjakkalle CLW 11:08, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: If the ship were larger, perhaps it would be notable, but we're not even talking about a large oil tanker or cruise ship. It's only 96 feet long and has a total crew of 4 people, smaller and fewer than some fishing boats. The number of ships that of that size or larger over the last few centuries is enormous. Also, "Victoria Star 2" gets only about 30 unique, non-porn search results, many of which are spam sites. -- Kjkolb 12:02, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
  • My "keep" votes aren't always to be interpreted as "keep as it is forever and don't ever try to merge it". If we had an article about the cruise company which owns the Victoria Star 2, I would be all for merging this ship and any other ship belonging to it in with that article since it provides more context. Information about a shipping companiy's ships is in my view relevant information which should be included in some form, preferably in the company article (which I don't think we have now). For now, I think the best thing is to let the article stay until we do get an article about the ship company. Sjakkalle (Check!) 12:14, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete I agree with Kjkolb. It's too small a ship to be significant without being further involved in some other affair. Marcus22 13:08, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Karol 18:12, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Per Kjkolb, Marcus; in this case the vessel in question is too insignificant to warrant an entry. Dottore So 20:56, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. There are literally dozens of ferries in the Georgia Straight, and this is about one of the most minor. -- Corvus 22:14, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as per Sjakkalle Carioca 22:42, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per Dottore So --JAranda | yeah 01:20, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as per Sjakkalle. Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 02:37, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete or Merge someplace - I read it over and agree with the other delete arguments here Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 08:50, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. This is like having individual articles on busses. Gamaliel 11:33, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. This is like having individual articles on transit routes. Like Green Line "C" Branch or Lake Shore Limited. The ferry makes one round trip a day, so they are the same thing in this case. --SPUI (talk) 00:51, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

  Comment. Read the article, this is quite clearly an individual ship and not a route. I just called Washington State Ferries and there are many ships that go between Victoria and the Washington mainland. There are two other, larger, companies that provide regular ferry service there as well, plus any number of charter services. Should I write an article about my car because I regularly drive to Seattle? -- Corvus 17:00, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

  • • In this case, the route is equivalent to the ship. If your car operated on a regular public schedule as a common carrier, it too would be "ntoable". --SPUI (talk) 18:55, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Some of the information could be included in a List of ferries in the Georgia Strait, or a similarly-titled article. Mindmatrix 19:47, 5 October 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.