Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steamboats of the Lower Fraser River and Harrison Lake

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 Keep, as per vigorous input in the discussion that affirmed the article's value and the ability to improve it through more diligent referencing. The lack of deletion votes beyond the nominator is also noted. A non-admin closure. And Adoil Descended (talk) 00:07, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Steamboats of the Lower Fraser River and Harrison Lake

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

Fringe trivial topic, content not referenced █ EMARSEE 19:09, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

~~STRONGLY Oppose~~ STRONG KEEP This article may not be as well-written as it should be, and whoever launched it from the former redlink on {{Steamboats British Columbia}} and/or related templates hasn't referenced it properly, but it's an important subject in BC history and the most important steamboat route in the history of early British Columbia, or all of British Columbia history. I meant to start it myself and/or improve it once it started, but my time has been taken up putting out fires like unwarranted speedies requiring exhaustive RMs and more....the names Frank Barnard and Hugh Nelson and Gassy Jack and many others are associated with this route and its vessels, as is the history of the Fraser Canyon and Cariboo Gold Rushes and other articles; too many to list here, in fact. Instead of nominating this for deletion, the nominating editor should have done some reading (readily available online) and improved the article instead of nominating it for deletion. I urge you withdraw this and give your head a shake and educate yourself and applying yourself to improving it, it's a fascinating subject and very extensive in scope and importance. More steamboats were on the Fraser River than there were on the Mississippi in this period, most notable early BC figures were associated with the history of these routes and companies and vessels, and the history of these vessels is intertwined with the Puget Sound Mosquito Fleet and the articles re Steamboats on the Columbia River (many of the same vessels and companies in fact). I have to go to bed, I'm shocked to see this nominated for deletion instead of improved. This is a central topic in the history of the Colony of British Columbia (1858-1866) and others....deleting it would be knee-jerk madness of the worst Wikipedian kind....it's late, I've just been challenged to start an AfD to get rid of two completely WP:TRIVIA/WP:UNDUE non-notable articles.....and now this. Good grief. Sorry for the spite, it's not meant that way. Point is editors who find under-referenced and poorly written articles should spend their energies improving them, not spending the energy and time of other editors who find it necessary to defend them, while other much more insignificant topics are allowed to stand simply because they have references that aren't notable...but are well-formatted. I'm going to bed....Skookum1 (talk) 19:53, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ Keep. The use of steamboats throughout the BC river systems. While the article does not have any sources at present it should not be too hard to find them, given access to a good library, based on the sources in some of the other articles in this series. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 23:13, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:20, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:20, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment References have been provided from articles easily linked, dozens of more available, the Steamboats BC template and other See also have been provided......the AfD should now be closed as irrelevant.Skookum1 (talk) 08:20, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - this is in no way WP:FRINGE as the nominator says, and references have been added. Pretty sure it meets WP:N, per above. Ansh666 21:44, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment User:CambridgeBayWeather and User:Skookum1, I recommend you change "oppose" to "keep" to avoid any potential confusion, since that's more standard. Just in case. Ansh666 21:44, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Changed mine. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 01:04, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto. Thanks. No way is this a fringe topic, not even close.Skookum1 (talk) 04:58, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This seems an encyclopedic (and rather important) topic to me and plenty of references have been provided. Because I do not have access to the books I can't check but I have no reason to doubt that they cover the topic. I have found a book available online so I have added it to "further reading". Thincat (talk) 07:57, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Needs some work but an important topic for the history of British Columbia. I am surprised that this would be nominated for deletion.Mtsmallwood (talk) 18:53, 11 June 2013 (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.