Wikipedia talk:Notability (vehicles)

Comments

For the record, this is a derivative of the proposed WP:Notability (aircraft) and most of the credit goes to the authors of that page. SDY (talk) 21:37, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My comments

First off, a definite raise of my glass for starting this out as an essay and soliciting comments here rather than going straight to a proposed guideline: I think that is a much better process. But second, I have to look at this one sceptically: I am a big believer in avoiding WP:CREEP, and so I have to ask myself: what does this add to what is already in the main guideline, WP:N. At present, the answer is "not much." WP:N is based on sources, and another question to ask is, is there even one AfD discussion that would have turned out differently if this were the guideline applied instead of WP:N? If you can point me to any, I would love to comment further, but I find it hard to beleive there are. Comments/reactions welcome. UnitedStatesian (talk) 04:27, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The notability guidelines tend to be interpreted with a grain of salt anyway. Mostly the reason for marking it as a guideline is simply for visibility, since essays aren't specifically in the infobox and this particular essay isn't unique to a particular project. Maybe just an indication that the structure of the navbox on WP:N could be reorganized. SDY (talk) 16:05, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This page may help prevent some articles from being started. May help cause some non-notable articles to get merged with other articles before they come to AfD. As an essay it should be of help like that. Whether it is needed enough to be maid an official guideline, not sure. -Fnlayson (talk) 14:01, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is the advice in this essay of any relevance to ships?

I have been contributing to the wikipedia since October 2004, and I have never heard of this essay.

Yesterday another contributor nominated four, count'em four articles I started on ships for deletion, claiming they violated WP:Notability (vehicles). It seemed to me these {{afd}} cited WP:Notability (vehicles) as if it were a policy or guideline -- when it is an essay.

It seems to me that while there is some value to the advice in this essay when considering cars, trucks, railway locomotives, even fighter and bomber aircraft and airliners. But I question whether it is appropriate advice for ships.

I looked in the history of Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Transportation, and couldn't find any instances of {{afd}}s of ships that referenced this essay.

I think this essay should be modified so it explicitly states its advice does not apply to ships.

It seems to me that the advice in this essay is both contrary to our usual practice with ships, and contrary to what makes sense.

Fighter aircraft and airliners can be as expensive as ships, or even more expensive. But they are also more standardized than ships. They undertake different kinds of missions. Fighters almost always fly in squadrons with identical fighters. Airliners share routes with identical airliners. Whereas naval vessels, coast guard vessels, fishery and environmental patrol vessels, tramp freighters, and many other kinds of ships normally proceed alone, on open ended voyages.

In my opinion the notability of ships should rely primarily on whether the vessel is well supported by reliable sources. Geo Swan (talk) 19:49, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. It is over two years, and my concern has not triggered any responses. Geo Swan (talk) 19:51, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]