642:
coverage of the incident has provided sufficient RS to source a brief article on the ship, and thereby, like it or not, made it a clear example of any ocean-going vessel that receives coverage in reliable sources being a suitable subject for an article. Also, the article on the company will need to be NPOV and not give undue weight to the incident - or other criticisms that may surface as a result of news coverage of the incident. But this is not a mere news event; the present title does lay undue weight on the incident. The gap we should attempt to fill as soon as possible for encyclopedic coverage is the company, and the incident should logically be covered as an episode in the company's history.
976:(the incident) as an example - most of the notability of that ship is from the oil spill, and there's little question that was a notable event, but even then I would think the ship and incident could be merged without losing any information. Here, we're already struggling with notability of the incident (per NEVENT) and that makes me question if even the ship is notable, and since the only bit about the ship is its participation in this. (This is a separate issue from the coatrack aspects). Really, this is a decent story to be covered at
679:, and as I say, the incident has made the company notable. As to the ship, my understanding is that the WikiProject sets a low bar; its vital statistics must be recorded somewhere, some of them are probably in the news coverage. I don't think the ship merits more than a stub, but I haven't looked into it yet so can't exclude the possibility that it has an interesting past. In short, there is no requirement for long or detailed articles on either the ship or the company; the real issue is whether they're notable, but I'd be surprised if
604:
of coverage in that there is no indication that once the result of any charges have been completed anyone anywhere will remember, care, or write about this incident again. (and of course THIS is the forum in which the notability of the subject is determined, and the tags indicating this discussion is
660:
While in theory that makes sense, there doesnt seem to be anything about either the ship or the company prior to the incident - leaving us in essentially the same place: no article about the ship because the only thing we can write about the ship is that its owners were involved in a potential crime
313:
The article was created about the ship. However, none of the sources are actually about the ship, they are about the incident the people who own/sail the ship were involved in - straying into Indian national waters carrying guns without proper licensing/charges of illicit procurement of fuel etc. As
1027:
to the ship's name); while it's sad that there are pirates today and a need to combat piracy, the tools, methods, politics, ... all of what is used to combat them, have notability (and notoriety, but that doesn't negate notability.) More ships will be involved, crossing boundaries inadvertently (or
1001:
Thank you Masem. I hope you don't mind my re-indenting this; your comment is relevant to the AfD as a whole and I don't want it to get lost in the mix. Editors: note how carefully Masem delineates notability and coatracking. These are the kinds of comments admins need to compile a final judgment on
935:
move the article's focus rather drastically just before an AfD, and that's what your move did. That's all. If editors here decide that the article is really not about the ship but about the incident, and/or if they think that this incident is coatracking and/or not noteworthy enough, they will vote
930:
And my move back does not mean that coatracking isn't a serious and valid issue to bring up here, far from it. But that's for participants here to decide. I don't really know what notability standards for ships are, to which extent basic factual information from registries etc. helps toward meeting
427:
Whichever of these three directions we took the article in, then there is interest and 3rd party coverage to support an article. Personally I'd tie it to the ship, as a ship, but others might have other opinions. A broad article on the use of floating armouries in these anti-piracy operations would
751:
In the overall thick of things, not really a notable event. No significant long term effects on the world at large are going to come of this, and because of previous coatracking/attack language that earlier forms of this article have, its purpose seems specifically aimed to cast certain people and
520:
The incident has received wide coverage in local media and is therefore significant enough to merit a wikipedia page. The issue of the incident also gains significance because it comes on the heels of a chorus of warnings from academia, industry, political and legal experts regarding the loosely
914:
That's obvious. Coatracking or not, the article was and is about the ship (ostensibly). If consensus decides that the ship can stand on its own merits, it stays. An AfD is about an article; this AfD is about the ship. The "incident" content (calling all of that verified content "coatracking" is
641:
with a section on the incident. The incident has made the company notable, but it's entering crystal ball territory to give the incident an article of its own; time will tell whether it results in any legal or procedural changes or receives continuing news coverage. Right now, however, the news
531:
For info (on 19 Oct 2013), the search term "MV Seaman Guard Ohio" at present has 182,000 results on Google Search and 8,190 results on Google News. The events surrounding "MV Seaman Guard Ohio" have received global coverage and through all major news sources : BBC, VOA, Fox News, Sky News, ABC,
1051:
packed my talk page with clutter by throwing in all kinds of tags ranging from "Potential conflict of interest", "Username issues", etc., just because I edited the article page with some information that is freely referenced in newspapers. He ought to
885:
I understand, and I'm not saying your move came out of nowhere. And there is no doubt that coatracking is an issue, but it's not one we can't handle if (as this AfD should decide) the article on the ship itself stands--with the incident as part of it.
915:
probably hasty) may or may not contribute to the ship's notability; that's for the participants to decide. (I'm not going to move this AfD--I hope participants will pay attention to these comments.) For instance, I'd appreciate it if
166:
927:
were added since, I grant you this immediately, the article in its current state does not have a lot to say about it. If there's really nothing to say about it, then Masem's point may well stand ("BLP1E as applied to non-ghost
282:
661:, no article about the company except that its employees were potentially involved in a crime, no article about the incident until enough time has passed to show that it is more than a news blip. --
538:
Given the fact that several media articles have talked about the persons managing AdvanFort not release us from citing company names and individuals who hold management positions in the firm ?
826:, and, really, common sense. Yngvadottir asked me about this, not so much to weigh in on the AfD or on the move, but on what to do with an AfC for the related article, about the company,
392:
160:
486:. I did in fact read your whole message and responded to the only part that had not already been addressed in the article nomination. Unless you feel the need to also be reminded of
119:
424:
has coverage that meets our standards to justify it as a "notable ship". Furthermore, this incident has also novelty and credible newspaper coverage to support it as an article.
827:
676:
576:
276:
830:. You can read their comments on the talk page; in a nutshell, they asked me (I believe) since it could be considered disruptive if they start shuffling content and what not.
836:'s previous edits certainly point in that direction. Bushranger is kind enough to assume good faith, and so am I, but that doesn't take away from the fact that the article
446:
we do not create subjects for secretive events for which there is not third party coverage. This particular ship and this particular event have not shown themselves to be
420:
This business of floating armouries as part of the anti-pirate measures is an interesting one and worthy of coverage. We have many article on individual ships and the MV
92:
87:
96:
372:
126:
1028:
not) and then they or their crews detained and further processes gather press. We will need to have articles about all of this, and this is a good place to start.
352:
79:
832:
At any rate, I wasn't aware until just now that the move was done in what could be considered a preparation for this AfD or at least an attendant operation:
1167:
561:
528:
After cross-checking with rules as defined on WP:GNG I think that there is a strong case for the removal of the NOTABILITY tag and also the DELETION tag.
1189:
1145:
980:, but seems like a footnote to an article or list of maritime incidents on en.wiki, due to the fact there was no loss of life or property involved. --
553:
221:
216:
859:
uhh - all versions of the article that I saw had 1 unsourced paragraph about the ships equipment. That's the extent of the article that was about
225:
198:
the AfD began as a discussion of the article under the above title. The article has been moved and the AfD should now be considered to be about:
545:
208:
181:
583:
148:
468:
a comment, rather than spotting the one word in it that blows your particular dog whistle and then completely ignoring the rest of it.
734:
Please cancel the redirect and move the wiki back to Ship Name. This incident can be a section under the wiki of MV Seaman Guard Ohio.
582:
Any attempt to delete/curtail this article would be unhelpful if done without consensus and prior discussions based on valid reasons.
83:
787:
706:
17:
297:
575:] that the text could be divided/distributed over 3 subjects (1) the ship "MV Seaman Guard Ohio", (2) the company "AdvanFort and
264:
786:, the ship itself is notable, as well explained by Yngvadottir and others above, and the fact that the coverage of the ship is
535:
As for a search on "AdvanFort", the numbers are as follows : 99,500 results for Google Search and 6,720 results for Google News.
1109:
1064:
1037:
1011:
992:
945:
909:
895:
880:
849:
809:
768:
743:
720:
692:
670:
651:
614:
591:
499:
477:
459:
437:
404:
384:
364:
344:
142:
61:
683:
more could be assembled on the ship, and I see usable data on the company just looking at the last source cited at the AfC.
1073:
634:
138:
75:
67:
1128:
40:
1095:
258:
443:
188:
1211:
596:
again, simply being in the news does not equate to being encyclopedic and meeting our requirements for an article.
569:
522:
964:: On the question whether the ship is notable: I again continue to take the concept (but not exact language) of
901:
872:
662:
606:
491:
451:
336:
323:
318:, yes there are a lot of potential things that might happen that might make this more than some news filler, but
254:
212:
803:
714:
587:
783:
702:
601:
304:
154:
1077:
1060:
1048:
973:
833:
473:
433:
487:
1124:
688:
647:
57:
36:
1056:
864:
1033:
815:
627:
332:
204:
597:
319:
315:
799:
710:
290:
174:
270:
756:
to some degree (yes, not a BLP, but we are taking about living people involved with the issue. --
965:
753:
698:
739:
469:
429:
400:
380:
360:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1123:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
1007:
941:
891:
845:
819:
684:
643:
53:
791:
483:
447:
1029:
988:
764:
798:
before this nomination was made, as a deliberate attempt to paint it as AfD-bait.) -
428:
be a good topic, but I suspect rather difficult to source from this secretive area.
969:
823:
735:
396:
376:
356:
871:
plays a completely trivial role other than being a convenient catch-all phrase.--
242:
113:
1053:
1003:
937:
931:
GNG requirements, and that's not really my job. But I do know that it's fair to
887:
841:
863:. And then it had ooodles and ooodles and oodles (and now even more oodles) of
442:
while the subject of floating armouries as part of the anti-pirate measures is
981:
916:
757:
638:
331:
01:57, 20 October 2013 (UTC) Note: that the article has been moved back to
977:
840:
about the ship, and that's what this discussion should focus on as well.
794:
might look at the move of the article from the ship name to "incident",
1117:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
900:
so is this AfD now about "the ship" or about "the incident"? --
707:
only coverage about the ship in the context of this incident
919:
comes by again to speak out on the notability of the ship
532:
France24,... and also press wires like
Reuters, AFP, etc.,
828:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:Articles for creation/AdvanFort (2)
577:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:Articles for creation/AdvanFort (2)
238:
234:
230:
109:
105:
101:
752:
companies involved in a negative light. I would evoke
314:
a current event, the " incident" also currently fails
289:
173:
579:
and (3) the incident "MV Seaman Guard Ohio incident".
515:(and remove the deletion tag and the notability tag).
605:
ongoing stay on while the discussion is ongoing. --
393:
303:
187:
320:we dont build articles on things that might happen
525:) and PMSC (Private Maritime Security Companies).
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1131:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1168:"Shadowy Arab billionaire behind armed US ship"
923:, and it would be helpful if verified content
637:, stub, and create an article on the company,
542:Armed ship in India had prior brushes with law
558:Shadowy Arab billionaire behind armed US ship
8:
675:I see some usable sources on the company at
391:Note: This debate has been included in the
371:Note: This debate has been included in the
351:Note: This debate has been included in the
1212:"Storm clouds gather over detained US ship"
373:list of Events-related deletion discussions
1002:an AfD or any other community discussion.
573:I've suggested on the article's talk page
390:
370:
353:list of India-related deletion discussions
350:
1190:"Not first brush with law for ship owner"
1146:"Not first brush with law for ship owner"
566:Storm clouds gather over detained US ship
1137:
550:Not first brush with law for ship owner
482:One feels the need to remind others of
1047:I find despicable the manner in which
560:- "The New Indian Express" newspaper
552:- "The New Indian Express" newspaper
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
782:; while the incident may or may not
968:applies. I consider the example of
24:
790:is irrelevant. (Also, those with
865:information about the "incident"
1:
1074:MV Seaman Guard Ohio incident
635:MV Seaman Guard Ohio incident
76:MV Seaman Guard Ohio incident
68:MV Seaman Guard Ohio incident
1110:09:13, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
1065:18:43, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
1038:17:53, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
1012:22:09, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
993:20:26, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
946:20:16, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
910:19:57, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
896:19:55, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
881:19:49, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
850:19:44, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
814:I've reverted the move, per
810:18:05, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
769:14:31, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
744:12:55, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
721:18:05, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
693:21:40, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
671:21:10, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
652:20:55, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
615:13:57, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
592:12:38, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
500:16:15, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
478:14:19, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
460:14:00, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
438:10:34, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
405:03:00, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
385:03:00, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
365:02:59, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
345:20:32, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
62:00:45, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
521:regulated industry of PMC (
464:If only you had the wit to
1240:
523:Private Military Companies
1054:stop seeing things in red
697:As the ship is neither a
1120:Please do not modify it.
788:WP:ONLYBECAUSEITHAPPENED
544:- "The Hindu" newspaper
32:Please do not modify it.
905:aka The Red Pen of Doom
876:aka The Red Pen of Doom
666:aka The Red Pen of Doom
610:aka The Red Pen of Doom
495:aka The Red Pen of Doom
455:aka The Red Pen of Doom
340:aka The Red Pen of Doom
327:aka The Red Pen of Doom
974:Exxon Valdez oil spill
1076:... seems notable...
415:(and reverse rename).
1192:. New Indian Express
1170:. New Indian Express
1148:. New Indian Express
1025:Move or Reverse Move
705:, the fact there is
600:The subject lacks a
333:MV Seaman Guard Ohio
205:MV Seaman Guard Ohio
626:, revert move from
568:- "The Telegraph"
48:The result was
906:
877:
709:is irrelevant. -
667:
630:Seaman Guard Ohio
611:
496:
456:
422:Seaman Guard Ohio
407:
387:
367:
341:
328:
199:
1231:
1224:
1223:
1221:
1219:
1208:
1202:
1201:
1199:
1197:
1186:
1180:
1179:
1177:
1175:
1164:
1158:
1157:
1155:
1153:
1142:
1122:
1107:
1106:
1105:
1093:
1092:
1091:
985:
907:
904:
878:
875:
806:
761:
717:
668:
665:
612:
609:
497:
494:
457:
454:
342:
339:
329:
326:
308:
307:
293:
246:
228:
197:
192:
191:
177:
129:
117:
99:
34:
1239:
1238:
1234:
1233:
1232:
1230:
1229:
1228:
1227:
1217:
1215:
1214:. The Telegraph
1210:
1209:
1205:
1195:
1193:
1188:
1187:
1183:
1173:
1171:
1166:
1165:
1161:
1151:
1149:
1144:
1143:
1139:
1135:
1129:deletion review
1118:
1103:
1102:
1097:
1096:
1087:
1086:
1079:
1078:
1072:and reverse to
1049:TheRedPenOfDoom
983:
972:(the ship) and
902:
873:
834:TheRedPenOfDoom
808:
804:
792:less good faith
759:
719:
715:
663:
607:
492:
452:
337:
324:
250:
219:
203:
134:
125:
90:
74:
71:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1237:
1235:
1226:
1225:
1203:
1181:
1159:
1136:
1134:
1133:
1113:
1112:
1098:
1080:
1067:
1041:
1040:
1017:
1016:
1015:
1014:
996:
995:
958:
957:
956:
955:
954:
953:
952:
951:
950:
949:
925:about the ship
854:
853:
812:
802:
800:The Bushranger
772:
771:
746:
728:
727:
726:
725:
724:
723:
713:
711:The Bushranger
695:
655:
654:
620:
619:
618:
617:
602:WP:PERSISTENCE
584:81.240.147.136
580:
571:
563:
555:
547:
539:
536:
533:
529:
526:
517:
516:
509:
508:
507:
506:
505:
504:
503:
502:
425:
417:
416:
409:
408:
388:
368:
311:
310:
247:
195:
194:
131:
70:
65:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1236:
1213:
1207:
1204:
1191:
1185:
1182:
1169:
1163:
1160:
1147:
1141:
1138:
1132:
1130:
1126:
1121:
1115:
1114:
1111:
1108:
1101:
1094:
1090:
1085:
1084:
1075:
1071:
1068:
1066:
1062:
1058:
1055:
1050:
1046:
1043:
1042:
1039:
1035:
1031:
1026:
1022:
1019:
1018:
1013:
1009:
1005:
1000:
999:
998:
997:
994:
990:
986:
979:
975:
971:
967:
963:
960:
959:
948:
947:
943:
939:
934:
926:
922:
918:
913:
912:
911:
908:
899:
898:
897:
893:
889:
884:
883:
882:
879:
870:
866:
862:
858:
857:
856:
855:
852:
851:
847:
843:
839:
835:
829:
825:
821:
817:
813:
811:
807:
805:One ping only
801:
797:
793:
789:
785:
781:
777:
774:
773:
770:
766:
762:
755:
750:
747:
745:
741:
737:
733:
730:
729:
722:
718:
716:One ping only
712:
708:
704:
700:
696:
694:
690:
686:
682:
678:
674:
673:
672:
669:
659:
658:
657:
656:
653:
649:
645:
640:
636:
632:
631:
625:
622:
621:
616:
613:
603:
599:
595:
594:
593:
589:
585:
581:
578:
574:
572:
570:
567:
564:
562:
559:
556:
554:
551:
548:
546:
543:
540:
537:
534:
530:
527:
524:
519:
518:
514:
511:
510:
501:
498:
489:
485:
481:
480:
479:
475:
471:
467:
463:
462:
461:
458:
449:
445:
441:
440:
439:
435:
431:
426:
423:
419:
418:
414:
411:
410:
406:
402:
398:
394:
389:
386:
382:
378:
374:
369:
366:
362:
358:
354:
349:
348:
347:
346:
343:
334:
330:
321:
317:
306:
302:
299:
296:
292:
288:
284:
281:
278:
275:
272:
269:
266:
263:
260:
256:
253:
252:Find sources:
248:
244:
240:
236:
232:
227:
223:
218:
214:
210:
206:
202:
201:
200:
190:
186:
183:
180:
176:
172:
168:
165:
162:
159:
156:
153:
150:
147:
144:
140:
137:
136:Find sources:
132:
128:
124:
121:
115:
111:
107:
103:
98:
94:
89:
85:
81:
77:
73:
72:
69:
66:
64:
63:
59:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1216:. Retrieved
1206:
1194:. Retrieved
1184:
1172:. Retrieved
1162:
1150:. Retrieved
1140:
1119:
1116:
1099:
1088:
1082:
1081:
1069:
1057:Arccotangent
1044:
1024:
1020:
970:Exxon Valdez
961:
932:
929:
924:
920:
868:
860:
837:
831:
795:
780:reverse move
779:
775:
748:
731:
680:
629:
623:
565:
557:
549:
541:
512:
488:WP:OTHERCRAP
470:Andy Dingley
465:
430:Andy Dingley
421:
412:
312:
300:
294:
286:
279:
273:
267:
261:
251:
196:
184:
178:
170:
163:
157:
151:
145:
135:
122:
49:
47:
31:
28:
820:Yngvadottir
796:immediately
685:Yngvadottir
644:Yngvadottir
444:interesting
277:free images
161:free images
54:Mark Arsten
1218:18 October
1196:20 October
1174:20 October
1152:20 October
816:Bushranger
598:WP:NOTNEWS
316:WP:NOTNEWS
1125:talk page
921:as a ship
867:of which
784:grow legs
639:AdvanFort
397:• Gene93k
377:• Gene93k
357:• Gene93k
37:talk page
1127:or in a
1104:arbonaro
978:Wikinews
966:WP:BLP1E
936:delete.
928:ships").
869:the ship
861:the ship
754:WP:BLP1E
120:View log
39:or in a
1045:Comment
962:Comment
824:Quartzd
736:Quartzd
681:nothing
677:the AfC
283:WP refs
271:scholar
222:protect
217:history
167:WP refs
155:scholar
93:protect
88:history
1089:aurice
1004:Drmies
938:Drmies
903:TRPoD
888:Drmies
874:TRPoD
842:Drmies
749:Delete
699:person
664:TRPoD
608:TRPoD
493:TRPoD
484:WP:NPA
453:TRPoD
448:WP:GNG
338:TRPoD
325:TRPoD
255:Google
226:delete
139:Google
97:delete
1023:(and
917:Masem
703:event
490:. --
450:. --
335:. --
322:. --
298:JSTOR
259:books
243:views
235:watch
231:links
182:JSTOR
143:books
127:Stats
114:views
106:watch
102:links
16:<
1220:2013
1198:2013
1176:2013
1154:2013
1070:keep
1061:talk
1034:talk
1030:htom
1021:Keep
1008:talk
984:ASEM
942:talk
892:talk
846:talk
778:and
776:Keep
760:ASEM
740:talk
732:Keep
689:talk
648:talk
624:Keep
588:talk
513:keep
474:talk
466:read
434:talk
413:keep
401:talk
381:talk
361:talk
291:FENS
265:news
239:logs
213:talk
209:edit
175:FENS
149:news
110:logs
84:talk
80:edit
58:talk
50:keep
933:not
838:was
701:or
633:to
628:MV
305:TWL
189:TWL
118:– (
1063:)
1036:)
1010:)
991:)
944:)
894:)
848:)
822:,
818:,
767:)
742:)
691:)
650:)
590:)
476:)
436:)
403:)
395:.
383:)
375:.
363:)
355:.
285:)
241:|
237:|
233:|
229:|
224:|
220:|
215:|
211:|
169:)
112:|
108:|
104:|
100:|
95:|
91:|
86:|
82:|
60:)
52:.
1222:.
1200:.
1178:.
1156:.
1100:C
1083:M
1059:(
1032:(
1006:(
989:t
987:(
982:M
940:(
890:(
844:(
765:t
763:(
758:M
738:(
687:(
646:(
586:(
472:(
432:(
399:(
379:(
359:(
309:)
301:·
295:·
287:·
280:·
274:·
268:·
262:·
257:(
249:(
245:)
207:(
193:)
185:·
179:·
171:·
164:·
158:·
152:·
146:·
141:(
133:(
130:)
123:·
116:)
78:(
56:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.