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.

The result was Snow Keep. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:31, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Greek destroyer Doxa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

I proposed this for deletion. It was contested, with the explanation: "Invalid rationale: no references is not a deletion criterion, and per WP:MILUNIT, the subject is notable in itself". The article, nevertheless, doesn't cite any sources, and there's a deletion criteria that says: "Articles for which thorough attempts to find reliable sources to verify them have failed". I could find anything relevant online. Of course, I am not an expert in the history of Greek navy, but surely the person who wrote the article can cite another source. Without any source there's no way to verify the information, so it shouldn't be here. Robkirwan (talk) 17:32, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Sources - [1] [2] [3] [4] - not much detail but at least they prove the ship did really exist. Roger (talk) 17:49, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Meh, that's a really poor argument for deletion, the sources Dodger67 found probably could have been found by anyone after a minute's google search. Doesn't matter now, the sources have been added into the article, so it's referenced. Buggie111 (talk) 18:49, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedily close as Keep. There are thousands upon thousands of articles without sources in WP, we don't simply delete them for that. We delete them if they can be proven not to have sources and/or not to correspond to reality, i.e. that they are hoax articles. I very much doubt if the nominator made even a cursory search on the subject. Constantine ✍ 19:34, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Sources have been added and the subject of this article meets the requirements of notability. Argos'Dad 19:50, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Encyclopedic subject, has been covered by secondary sources. Along with the ones already mentioned, here's another source: Conway's All the World's Fighting Ships, 1906-1921 published by the United States Naval Institute. There are also some earlier documents from the early 20th century that I'm unable to access. Either way, the subject meets the general notability guideline.--xanchester (t) 21:56, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:45, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:45, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. All warships are generally considered to be notable. Lack of sources is not a reason for deletion. -- Necrothesp (talk) 23:37, 30 October 2012 (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.