119:. It may be 'obvious' with the USN LSTs, but it certainly is not so with Royal Navy LSTs, and that doesn't even consider LSTs that other nations had which could perfectly well be put on the list. There might be a case for making it a disambig page with links to national LST lists, but certainly not for deleting it completely. The list is structured list so far as I can see so it does not come under WP:NOT in that respect, or in any other respect. AFD is used for those articles that come under the terms of WP:NOT or for those articles that are thought to come under those terms. I cannot see which term of WP:NOT applies to this list.
89:
I question the importance and usefulness of a 38kb list of ships. The US ones at least have pretty obvious names anyway and I think that about 14 of this first section of 1070 links are blue at present. If anyone is interested in these vessels, I find it unlikely that they will search for this list
166:
A ship used to deliver tanks (and other things) to a shore somewhere. Think of the famous
Normandy Beach footage of soldiers poring out of those ships onto the beach. The military loves to be heirarchial and precise, so this is really a
131:. I have removed the redlinks from the US list, because that info really doesn't tell us anything useful (unlike on the UK list), but this page is a handy jumping off point for the articles that do exist.
107:
this may be a list for a project, to "fill in" missing articles. If so, it should be kept or at least userfied. I have left a query on the page creators talk page concerning the purpose of this list.
157:
307:
as well, unlike other lists this one is verifiable and maintainable (though possibly deprecatable when we're ready to redirect elsewhere).
90:
specifically, as they will probably know the number of the vessel they are looking for. As such I am posting this on AfD, whilst myself
17:
318:
171:
which puts the most important noun first, followed by a qualifier. In a rational world, there would also be things like
350:
36:
349:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
206:
136:
94:
ing (I am not an expert on list policies etc. and I'd rather let more experienced persons than myself decide.)
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
56:
335:
323:
313:
297:
280:
246:
234:
218:
201:
194:
182:
161:
138:
123:
111:
98:
77:
108:
272:
255:
132:
214:
209:
may help clarify what an LST is - it's a bit larger than "landing ship" might be interpreted as.
198:
71:
147:
120:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
308:
294:
258:
332:
210:
179:
63:
51:
243:
83:
291:
231:
95:
152:
343:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
290:. This is consistent with the other ship lists. Sheesh. —
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
353:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
254:the list as amended very sensibly by
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
1:
331:as a valid, verifiable list.
44:The result of the debate was
78:00:10, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
336:00:36, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
324:21:32, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
298:15:23, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
281:19:22, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
247:14:21, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
235:13:57, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
219:20:45, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
202:13:05, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
183:00:36, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
162:05:14, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
139:23:05, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
124:22:33, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
112:21:59, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
99:20:14, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
370:
207:Image:LST-357 loading.jpg
346:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
173:landing ship, artillery
195:Landing Ship, Infantry
177:landing ship, troop
169:landing ship, tank
148:Landing Ship Tank
75:
361:
348:
311:
278:
275:
270:
267:
264:
261:
76:
69:
66:
61:
54:
34:
369:
368:
364:
363:
362:
360:
359:
358:
357:
351:deletion review
344:
321:
316:
309:
276:
273:
268:
265:
262:
259:
160:
109:KillerChihuahua
87:
64:
57:
52:
49:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
367:
365:
356:
355:
339:
338:
326:
319:
314:
301:
300:
284:
283:
256:GeorgeStepanek
249:
237:
224:
223:
222:
221:
204:
188:
187:
186:
185:
156:
141:
133:GeorgeStepanek
126:
114:
86:
81:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
366:
354:
352:
347:
341:
340:
337:
334:
330:
327:
325:
322:
317:
312:
306:
303:
302:
299:
296:
293:
292:Joseph/N328KF
289:
286:
285:
282:
279:
271:
257:
253:
250:
248:
245:
241:
238:
236:
233:
229:
226:
225:
220:
216:
212:
208:
205:
203:
200:
199:GraemeLeggett
196:
192:
191:
190:
189:
184:
181:
178:
174:
170:
165:
164:
163:
159:
155:
154:
149:
146:- What is a "
145:
142:
140:
137:
134:
130:
127:
125:
122:
118:
115:
113:
110:
106:
103:
102:
101:
100:
97:
93:
85:
82:
80:
79:
73:
68:
67:
62:
60:
55:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
345:
342:
328:
310:RasputinAXP
304:
287:
251:
239:
227:
176:
172:
168:
151:
143:
128:
121:David Newton
116:
104:
91:
88:
84:List of LSTs
58:
50:
45:
43:
31:
28:
150:" anyway?!
153:Cyde Weys
333:Turnstep
320:contribs
211:Shimgray
180:Turnstep
244:Oldfarm
144:Comment
105:Comment
92:Abstain
295:(Talk)
232:Jinian
197:(LSI)
193:It's
53:howch
16:<
329:Keep
315:talk
305:Keep
288:Keep
252:Keep
240:Keep
228:Keep
215:talk
175:and
158:vote
129:Keep
117:Keep
72:chat
46:keep
269:493
96:Dan
277:lk
274:Ta
266:ns
263:yo
260:Dl
242:.
230:.
217:|
213:|
65:ng
48:.
135:\
74:}
70:{
59:e
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.