Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/USS Tahgayuta (1863)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 merge to USS_Contoocook_(1864)#Contoocook_class_sloop.2Ffrigate. (non-admin closure) Nördic Nightfury 08:45, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

USS Tahgayuta (1863)[edit]

USS Tahgayuta (1863) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Never finished. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 17:51, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This AFD is directly related to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/USS Mondamin (1864), about another ship in the class, an AFD opened same day by same editor. --doncram 14:57, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 18:01, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 18:04, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What was never finished - the ship, or the article? Advocata (talk) 19:47, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch 19:50, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 11:21, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge/redirect: agree that merging and redirecting to a class article is probably the best approach for the cancelled vessels of this class. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 07:47, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would have said delete, but will go along with the proposal to redirect to a list article on the class. If I understand the article correctly, not only was the ship not finished, but probably never started. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:46, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To discuss where to merge this to exactly
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SoWhy 07:56, 13 June 2017 (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.