482:
applied to things like football matches; the match report is mere routine coverage. It is not usually applied to things that find their way into books (and a football match that did so would then be more than routine). I don't see the point of citing WP:EXIST. This is not merely evidence that the thing exists, it is evidence that a reliable source considered it notable.
481:
In what way is that routine coverage? It is a book about sailboats. Clearly, the author has not included every sailboat ever built. He has included the ones he feels are notable. That is our definition of notability: a reliable source has noted it. The "routine coverage" argument is usually
388:
and then nominate it for deletion. Would the closer please note that the comments in this debate were all made on the basis of the stubbed article. It would have been fairer just to nominate it and let it stand or fall on its contents. I really can't agree with the removal of material on the
467:(hopefully it doesn't read as antagonistic, it's meant to be tongue-in-cheek), wikipedia would be drowning in articles for every song ever written, every house ever built, etc if there was not some limit on what is considered notable.
173:
584:
507:. I agree that most of the material removed just prior to this AfD was spammy-fluff. But, the Field Guild to Sailboats cited above appears to be a reliable source. I've also found:
389:
grounds that it is about individual boats of the class. It is perfectly normal to discuss notable individual vessels in an article about the class. For instance, every article in
289:
167:
585:
http://books.google.com/books?id=lLBpvRlT80UC&lpg=PA117&ots=5hUB6y-TZw&dq=dickerson%20yachts&pg=PA117#v=onepage&q=dickerson%20yachts&f=false
269:
126:
251:
notable (which IMHO is much less likely than, say, an individual boat of the model series being notable), it should be included in the article about the builder.
309:
566:
For the
Dickerson 41 specifically, I agree the reference situation is pretty thin. But, we do a bit better for Dickerson Yachts, as a company:
63:
133:
52:. While there are some qualified comments to weak keep, it isn't convincing enough to overcome what appears to be a consensus to delete.
519:
99:
94:
103:
17:
530:
existed, I would certainly support merging into that, but we don't currently have such an article. Possibly rename this to
188:
394:
86:
569:
534:, restore some of the less fluffy material which was deleted, and include a list of other models built by Dickerson? --
155:
390:
629:
40:
589:
149:
597:
488:
451:
405:
59:
145:
625:
610:
557:
541:
493:
476:
456:
429:
410:
376:
357:
321:
301:
281:
260:
237:
213:
68:
36:
531:
527:
393:
includes a list of the individual vessels and, where notable, some of their history. As for sources,
372:
195:
472:
425:
350:
256:
222:
A lot of this rides on whether sailboat models themselves are notable. I can find some specs (e.g.
181:
579:
607:
538:
483:
446:
400:
520:
http://www.sailnet.com/forums/general-discussion-sailing-related/68846-dickerson-41-ketch.html
317:
297:
277:
209:
90:
53:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
624:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
596:
which is why I think it might make sense to rename this (the more correct name appears to be
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
233:
464:
399:
has a section on the
Dickerson 41 and I am seeing numerous mentions in sailing magazines.
368:
161:
445:
can you explain why you think the book I linked to above is not evidence of notability?
420:
even considering the previous state of the article, there is no evidence of notability.
514:
468:
440:
421:
337:
252:
223:
570:
http://www.stardem.com/news/article_c998ad90-f03d-5ac3-b417-eac5acbe22d9.html?mode=jqm
604:
552:
535:
313:
293:
273:
205:
82:
74:
120:
574:
333:
229:
226:
228:; looking around it's a reasonably well-known boat in the yachting community.
590:
http://www.oceannavigator.com/January-February-2003/Reviving-an-old-design/
600:) and use that as the start of a new article (preserving the history).
526:
neither of which are wonderful sources, but provide some support. If
618:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
580:
http://www.woodtoglass.org/builders/dickerson-boatbuilders.html
204:
tagged for notability since march 2009. Non notable IMO
385:
116:
112:
108:
180:
551:
Even with that, there is no evidence of notability.
515:
http://www.svsoutherncross.com/goodboat/goodboat.htm
290:
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
632:). No further edits should be made to this page.
225:) and something like a history of the builder
575:http://oya.com/dickerson/DickersonHistory.pdf
270:list of Business-related deletion discussions
194:
8:
308:Note: This debate has been included in the
288:Note: This debate has been included in the
268:Note: This debate has been included in the
396:A Field Guide to Sailboats of North America
367:. No 3rd parties have mentioned this boat.
310:list of Sports-related deletion discussions
307:
287:
267:
463:I believe it is routine coverage. As per
7:
24:
247:. Unless the sailboat model is
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
386:remove the bulk of an article
649:
391:list of battleship classes
611:00:46, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
558:23:20, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
542:21:46, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
494:12:13, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
477:11:59, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
457:10:09, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
430:09:10, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
411:13:03, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
384:. It is disingenuous to
377:22:21, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
358:00:43, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
322:00:24, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
302:00:24, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
282:00:24, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
69:02:00, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
621:Please do not modify it.
261:14:24, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
238:14:03, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
214:13:14, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify it.
598:Dickerson Boatbuilders
332:as no evidence of any
48:The result was
324:
304:
284:
66:
640:
623:
555:
532:Dickerson Yachts
528:Dickerson Yachts
444:
355:
347:
342:
199:
198:
184:
136:
124:
106:
64:
34:
648:
647:
643:
642:
641:
639:
638:
637:
636:
630:deletion review
619:
553:
438:
351:
343:
338:
141:
132:
97:
81:
78:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
646:
644:
635:
634:
615:
614:
613:
601:
594:
593:
592:
587:
582:
577:
572:
561:
560:
545:
544:
524:
523:
522:
517:
509:
508:
501:
500:
499:
498:
497:
496:
460:
459:
433:
432:
414:
413:
379:
361:
360:
326:
325:
305:
285:
264:
263:
241:
240:
202:
201:
138:
77:
72:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
645:
633:
631:
627:
622:
616:
612:
609:
606:
602:
599:
595:
591:
588:
586:
583:
581:
578:
576:
573:
571:
568:
567:
565:
564:
563:
562:
559:
556:
550:
547:
546:
543:
540:
537:
533:
529:
525:
521:
518:
516:
513:
512:
511:
510:
506:
503:
502:
495:
492:
491:
487:
486:
480:
479:
478:
474:
470:
466:
462:
461:
458:
455:
454:
450:
449:
442:
437:
436:
435:
434:
431:
427:
423:
419:
416:
415:
412:
409:
408:
404:
403:
398:
397:
392:
387:
383:
380:
378:
374:
370:
366:
363:
362:
359:
356:
354:
348:
346:
341:
335:
331:
328:
327:
323:
319:
315:
311:
306:
303:
299:
295:
291:
286:
283:
279:
275:
271:
266:
265:
262:
258:
254:
250:
246:
243:
242:
239:
235:
231:
227:
224:
221:
218:
217:
216:
215:
211:
207:
197:
193:
190:
187:
183:
179:
175:
172:
169:
166:
163:
160:
157:
154:
151:
147:
144:
143:Find sources:
139:
135:
131:
128:
122:
118:
114:
110:
105:
101:
96:
92:
88:
84:
80:
79:
76:
73:
71:
70:
67:
61:
57:
56:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
620:
617:
548:
504:
489:
484:
452:
447:
417:
406:
401:
395:
381:
364:
352:
344:
339:
329:
248:
244:
219:
203:
191:
185:
177:
170:
164:
158:
152:
142:
129:
83:Dickerson 41
75:Dickerson 41
55:Dennis Brown
54:
49:
47:
31:
28:
168:free images
369:Frmorrison
334:notability
626:talk page
505:Weak Keep
469:1292simon
441:1292simon
422:1292simon
314:• Gene93k
294:• Gene93k
274:• Gene93k
253:Tupsumato
220:weak keep
37:talk page
628:or in a
605:RoySmith
554:Reywas92
536:RoySmith
485:Spinning
465:WP:EXIST
448:Spinning
418:Delete -
402:Spinning
127:View log
39:or in a
206:Gbawden
174:WP refs
162:scholar
100:protect
95:history
608:(talk)
549:Delete
539:(talk)
365:Delete
353:(talk)
330:Delete
245:Delete
230:Mangoe
146:Google
104:delete
50:delete
490:Spark
453:Spark
407:Spark
340:Davey
189:JSTOR
150:books
134:Stats
121:views
113:watch
109:links
16:<
473:talk
426:talk
382:Keep
373:talk
345:2010
318:talk
298:talk
278:talk
257:talk
249:very
234:talk
210:talk
182:FENS
156:news
117:logs
91:talk
87:edit
603:--
336:. –
196:TWL
125:– (
65:WER
475:)
428:)
375:)
349:•
320:)
312:.
300:)
292:.
280:)
272:.
259:)
236:)
212:)
176:)
119:|
115:|
111:|
107:|
102:|
98:|
93:|
89:|
62:|
60:2¢
58:|
471:(
443::
439:@
424:(
371:(
316:(
296:(
276:(
255:(
232:(
208:(
200:)
192:·
186:·
178:·
171:·
165:·
159:·
153:·
148:(
140:(
137:)
130:·
123:)
85:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.