Talk:Costa Luminosa
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Ship-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome. |  |
| Stub | rated as Stub-Class on the assessment scale | |
| Mid | rated as Mid-importance on the assessment scale |
 |
This article has a deprecated, subst'ed or incorrect infobox and needs a new one. Please replace with {{Infobox Ship Begin/doc}} |
[edit] PROD tag
I do not understand why this page was marked for deletion. I just made this page, and am still editing it. Also, very little information has arrived about this cruise ship as it is very new. Its keen was just made in October. So as more information arrives, this page will grow larger. If there is something else wrong with this page, please let me know.
- My concerns about this page were the following, it doesn't assert why the subject of this article is notable. WP:N For now, however, I think the about reference is enough for presumed notability. I either missed it on first glance, or you added it after I looked at the article. I'll give you a hand in wikifying it a little, and good luck expanding it! Martijn Hoekstra 23:24, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
- Also, try to watch for an encyclopedic tone. As it stands now, the article reads a little like an advert. Martijn Hoekstra 23:29, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
-
- Ok, thank you. I did in fact edit the resource, links, and box after you marked it for deletion. Very very very little information has been released about it, and so thats why it looks like it is. Thank you for understanding, and thank you for the advice. Romulan248 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.210.191.202 (talk) 23:57, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
- If there is so little information, do you think it meets the notability and verifyability guildlines WP:V and WP:N? Just take a look at them, one is a core policy (WP:V) and the other is a very important guideline. Martijn Hoekstra 00:05, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- Well, it definetly meets WP:V standards. I have some more resources if you think I should add them. As for the WP:N, I'm not sure. I don't quite understand it all too much. I believe that the subject of this cruise ship is as notable as any other cruise ship still under construction. For example, the Carnival Dream, Independence of the Seas, MS Eurodam, and even the F3 (ship). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Romulan248 (talk • contribs) 01:33, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- There has been historicaly much debate over the notability guidelines. There are roughly two camps, the inclutionists (why not put it in if it's verifyable), and the Deletionists (why does it need to be in an enyclopedia if it isn't notable). Me, I'm a bit of a fence sitter. If you would sometimes take a look at the newpages list, you will see that an insane amount of material is added every day, of which much obviously is not notable (i.e. the demo CD a band just recorded in their garage, or that Jake is a dude that attends Anonymous Highschool in Springfield US). A lot of people periodicly patrole those pages, and put up speedy deletion tags, or PROD tags, like what I did to your page. I took a quick look those other links you provided of cruise ships being built, and they have a lot less going for them than your article, seeing that yours has an independant reliable source commenting about it, the about link (though I do expect it to be a press release, at least it has been placed by a large media site). However, don't bee all too surprised if someone decided to take it to articles for deletion on notability grounds at some point. I'll post a welcome template on your talk page, which contains a lot of usefull links about core policies. For now, don't be too worried about making an honost mistake or two. Wikipedia is a large project, and when you do something wrong, there is always someone who will put it right again. Do note however, that with everything you do on wikipedia, you give the project the right to do whatever it wants with the texts you supply, and that it may be changed and edited relentlessly, or even deleted. Sometimes, there are even other editors that will treat your edits with disdain and insult. Best thing to do about that, is just stay cool, and things always work out. Having said that, Wikipedia is populated by friendly people, who are all here to do something that is surely noble: write a free encyclopedia. Good luck in editing, and if you have any questions or comments, just drop a note on my talk page, and I'll see if I can help you out, or refer you to someone who can. Martijn Hoekstra 10:43, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, thank you. I am trying to find a lot more information about this cruise ship. Its fairly new to me to make Wiki pages with subjects that have so little information. The last one (and first) I made was the Costa Serena. But thank you for all the information that you have provided. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Romulan248 (talk • contribs) 22:34, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- There has been historicaly much debate over the notability guidelines. There are roughly two camps, the inclutionists (why not put it in if it's verifyable), and the Deletionists (why does it need to be in an enyclopedia if it isn't notable). Me, I'm a bit of a fence sitter. If you would sometimes take a look at the newpages list, you will see that an insane amount of material is added every day, of which much obviously is not notable (i.e. the demo CD a band just recorded in their garage, or that Jake is a dude that attends Anonymous Highschool in Springfield US). A lot of people periodicly patrole those pages, and put up speedy deletion tags, or PROD tags, like what I did to your page. I took a quick look those other links you provided of cruise ships being built, and they have a lot less going for them than your article, seeing that yours has an independant reliable source commenting about it, the about link (though I do expect it to be a press release, at least it has been placed by a large media site). However, don't bee all too surprised if someone decided to take it to articles for deletion on notability grounds at some point. I'll post a welcome template on your talk page, which contains a lot of usefull links about core policies. For now, don't be too worried about making an honost mistake or two. Wikipedia is a large project, and when you do something wrong, there is always someone who will put it right again. Do note however, that with everything you do on wikipedia, you give the project the right to do whatever it wants with the texts you supply, and that it may be changed and edited relentlessly, or even deleted. Sometimes, there are even other editors that will treat your edits with disdain and insult. Best thing to do about that, is just stay cool, and things always work out. Having said that, Wikipedia is populated by friendly people, who are all here to do something that is surely noble: write a free encyclopedia. Good luck in editing, and if you have any questions or comments, just drop a note on my talk page, and I'll see if I can help you out, or refer you to someone who can. Martijn Hoekstra 10:43, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- Well, it definetly meets WP:V standards. I have some more resources if you think I should add them. As for the WP:N, I'm not sure. I don't quite understand it all too much. I believe that the subject of this cruise ship is as notable as any other cruise ship still under construction. For example, the Carnival Dream, Independence of the Seas, MS Eurodam, and even the F3 (ship). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Romulan248 (talk • contribs) 01:33, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- If there is so little information, do you think it meets the notability and verifyability guildlines WP:V and WP:N? Just take a look at them, one is a core policy (WP:V) and the other is a very important guideline. Martijn Hoekstra 00:05, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, thank you. I did in fact edit the resource, links, and box after you marked it for deletion. Very very very little information has been released about it, and so thats why it looks like it is. Thank you for understanding, and thank you for the advice. Romulan248 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.210.191.202 (talk) 23:57, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
