Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/French ship Héros (1752)

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.

French ship Héros (1752)

The result was Snow keep. Thryduulf (talk) 13:46, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

No refs on the page for many years. I see some refs to the ship in offwiki databases but I don't see anything to suggest it did anything particularly notable and WP:NOTDATABASE JMWt (talk) 07:19, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and France. JMWt (talk) 07:19, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There appears to be plenty of content and sourcing in the fr.wiki article. -Ljleppan (talk) 08:19, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. We have generally considered all commissioned warships to be notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:51, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: This is a substantial naval vessel (a third rate), and we generally keep naval vessels. I have added a secondary source that gives part of her service career, and have added some info about that service. I don't have access to French sources such as Troude, and my knowledge of French is minimal, but I suspect that a little search might add more info. Acad Ronin (talk) 12:44, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I wish editors would realize that any lack of expansion or referencing over time has no bearing on notability. There are tens of thousands ship articles that are all notable. It takes time to get to them!--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 13:18, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The WP:BURDEN to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds the information - or presumably any wikiproject that takes responsibility for it. WP:VERIFY also states that quote "Any material lacking an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the material may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source". So, by rights, I can challenge any facts which do not have inline citations (which to be clear is everything on a page that has zero references) and then remove them until an inline reference is supplied. I appreciate that your WikiProject may well have internal notability standards, but the overall standards for inclusion are the WP:GNG, and as far as I can see those references on fr.wiki are primarily short brief mentions and from databases. It is entirely possible that I'm wrong, but in that case instead of attempting to shut down discussion about pages that have had zero references since 2007, how about offering reasons why this page meets the WP:GNG other than because your special area has special status at AfD discussions. JMWt (talk) 13:48, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 11:51, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:GNG. Nomination implies there is an expiration date on WP articles. There isn't. Nominations should be based on an analysis of potential sources (unless it is a case of NOT, potential TNT, or move/merge through AfD). Here, the sources were only one click away. gidonb (talk) 12:55, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

~~Do rename to Héros (1752 ship). The title is very improper.~~ gidonb (talk) 13:03, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, that's not how we do ship names. See WP:NCSHIPS--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 13:18, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. This is regulated by a navy exception. The global standard is better but rules are rules. Thanks for pointing to these! gidonb (talk) 13:52, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep ref added. WP:BEFORE applies Lyndaship (talk) 15:15, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep plenty of refs on fr.wiki. Mccapra (talk) 19:10, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The french page on this has a ton of sources and opportunity for expansion.KatoKungLee (talk) 01:45, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep References required for WP:GNG do not have to appear in the article. French version seems fine. More than will to believe that WP:MILHIST and WP:SHIPS will get around to it one day. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:05, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. It's snowing! gidonb (talk) 15:45, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. Snow keep. Acad Ronin (talk) 21:13, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.