Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wherry Maud

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. -- Cirt (talk) 11:38, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Wherry Maud

Wherry Maud (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

Notability zero. Concept album (talk) 11:21, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

• Delete Apparently the lesser known brother of Albion (wherry), with no sources or current notable use. Ezhuks (talk) 11:30, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Keep; now that the article has been expanded greatly. --Ezhuks (talk) 16:23, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
• Keep This wherry is notable as it is one of only two surviving trading wherries. The other five six surviving wherries are wherry yachts. The boat is listed on the National Historic Ships Register. OK, the article needs expansion and improvement, but that is not a reason to delete. Mjroots (talk) 12:25, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Note article retitled to Maud (wherry) per WP:MOSSHIP, rewritten, which should address the notability concerns expressed by the nominator. Mjroots (talk) 14:12, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
• Keep an historic vessel (though no relation to Albion - different construction method) and some sourcing has been supplied. (I will admit to being a Norfolk man myself but don't think my judgement is clouded on this)GraemeLeggett (talk) 14:15, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
• Keep — Historic vessel. —Diiscool (talk) 17:08, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
• Keep per everyone above and big thank you to Mjroots for a great rescue job. Nancy ^talk 20:46, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Thanks, although I accept the nom was made in good faith and that at the time the article did not really assert the notability of the boat. I've also improved the Albion article from this to this. Mjroots (talk) 07:37, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
• Suggest Speedy Keep - NHS vessels are automatically notable. Parsecboy (talk) 21:55, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
• As Parsecboy indicated, anything on the register of National Historic Ships in the UK should be Speedy Keep — Kralizec! (talk) 02:12, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
• Keep - The souces and the NHS status do strongly indicate notability. Nice work, Mjroots. It's curious that the nom so curtly worded their objection to this article with no argument to back the statement up.--Oakshade (talk) 18:15, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

• The nominator is not a very active editor. Let's be clear, This was the state of the article at nomination. At best, the claim to notability made then is slight, the nomination was made in good faith. Sometimes, nominating an article at AfD does lead to significant improvement of the article, as in this case. I happened to know the importance of this boat, as I know the restorers and lived in Norfolk for a number of years. It was on my long-term "to-do" list anyway. Now, anyone fancy creating articles on the other six wherries? Mjroots (talk) 19:36, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:18, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
• Keep -- As a rare survivor of an important class of vessels. This is certainly notable. That does not necessarily mean we need articles on all the rest. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:52, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

• There are only 8 surviving wherries (9 if you count the half-sunken The Lord Roberts) out of over 300 built. All bar one of the survivors are also on the register - Hathor, Norada, Olive, Solace and White Moth, leaving Ardea as the only wherry not listed. Probably due to her history of being a houseboat on the Seine in Paris and thus outside the UK for many years. Mjroots (talk) 18:25, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

• Update, National Historic Ships are in discussion with the owner of Ardea re inclusion on the register. Registration is down to the owner applying and the vessel meeting the necessary criteria. It is not something that can be imposed on a vessel against an owner's wishes, unlike the process for listing buildings. Mjroots (talk) 09:03, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

• Keep as notable following Mjroots rescue. MilborneOne (talk) 22:02, 23 September 2010 (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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.