Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/German submarine U-1012

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 speedy redirect to Type VII submarine#Type VIIC/41. Withdrawn in favor of redirect discussed below. (non-admin closure) Hog Farm _Bacon 23:29, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

German submarine U-1012[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am personally unconvinced that there is anything notable here. This was a submarine that was started, the incomplete hulk was bombed, and the Nazis decided to just scrap the project. All that's in the article is just that much, and a recap of the design specifications of the class. There's just not enough to have a stand-alone article on this subject, or to meet WP:GNG. Normally, military ships are considered to be notable, but this seems to be an exception to me, given the circumstances. At most, this can be a sentence or two in the submarine class article. Hog Farm _Bacon 21:51, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm _Bacon 21:51, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm _Bacon 21:51, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm _Bacon 21:51, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Type VIIC/41#Type VIIC/41. As the nominator notes completed/commissioned ships are by very long established consensus considered notable. However ships that were never completed are not considered such - indeed as WP:SHIPS/AFD demonstrates the standard, even for battleships, is to merge or redirect as appropriate. Indeed if @Hog Farm: would be willing to withdraw this nomination I would be happy to go ahead and WP:BOLDly redirect this to the class page accordingly. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 23:08, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- The Bushranger - Or would List of U-boats never deployed be a better target? I'm fine to withdraw as soon as the best target is determined. There are several other bluelinks at the list page that should probably also be redirected. Hog Farm _Bacon 23:13, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Hog Farm While I can't speak definitively on this, looking at that list makes me squint just a little and wonder just how encyclopedic it is (but that's a much bigger discussion for another time another place). The de facto consensus standard for unbuilt ships is merge/redirect to the class, so (with two plausible redirect targets in question) it would probably be best to do that - that way the greenlink/redirect on the list page will also point to the class page. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 23:16, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.