Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/USS Ulua (SS-428)

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 keep. So Why 06:57, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

USS Ulua (SS-428)[edit]

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

Ship was cancelled, should be redirected unless community views an article is necessary. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 14:56, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to class article. Brad (talk) 08:32, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:57, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:50, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:50, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:50, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is a well referenced article about a named ship of the United States Navy.FFA P-16 (talk) 17:23, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to class article; not completed. Kierzek (talk) 17:46, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - Well referenced, actual ship. I think that never completed isn't the same as not completed to original specifications. Passes V, NOR, NPOV, and entry in NAFS is not trivial. Smmurphy^(Talk) 18:18, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:36, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It is a fully developed, sourced article, with photo and detailed infobox. (By the way, about the armaments asserted in the infobox, I wonder if they might have been planned but not installed, in which case that should be noted. But this is a detail for editing at the article.) No purpose served by removing this from the encyclopedia. --do ncr am 22:43, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Balao-class submarine, as not completed project; the article itself tells us that it was the "only submarine" named after a particular fish, while the infobox is twice as long as the actual article, including references. Can be briefly mentioned in the target article. Suggesting a redirect as anything useful can be picked up from the article history. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:45, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep; convention is that a named commissioned military ship is notable, and while this one wasn't commissioned, she did serve in a fashion, so for me that's good enough given that the article is pretty complete and simply redirecting to the class page would leave the reader with less information than keeping the article. The Wicked Twisted Road (talk) 01:22, 6 April 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.