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.
Strong keep - very first Ghit is a magazine's website on the ship; gBooks turns up hits like this, this, this, this, this, this...I could go on, as there are quite a few others. Clear failure of WP:BEFORE, notability and availability of reliable sources are very clearly established. - The BushrangerOne ping only 23:27, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per evidence found by The Bushranger.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:32, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - nominator clearly didn't try very hard on this one. This should probably be SNOWed Parsecboy (talk) 23:36, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Not only is the reasoning extremely weak and now easily disproved by Bushranger, it seems to depend excessively upon internet searches. As I stated at the deletion discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MV Ramsey, there are many many print sources out there for these ships, viz: Isle of Man Shipping: The Twilight Years, Ian H. Collard; Coastal Shipping of the Isle of Man 1946 - Present Day, by Stan Basnett, Steam Packet 175: The Official Anniversary Book of the Isle of Man Steam Packet Company, by Miles Cowsill and John Hendy; Ferries of the Isle of Man 1945 - Present Day, by Stan Basnett, So Strong and So Fair: Story of the Side-Loading Car Ferries of the Isle of Man Steam Packet Company and Their People. by Richard Danielson; Ships of the Isle of Man Steam Packet Company, by Ken Hassell and Steven Dearden and Ferries of the Isle of Man: Past and Present, by Stan Basnett, etc, etc. No valid secondary sources? Decisively disproved! Benea (talk) 23:38, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The nominator may not have appreciated why IoM ferries are inherently likely to pass for notability. Similar considerations are likely to apply to those serving other island communities. But the article did make a very clear assertion of notability in this particular case. As with some other AfDs, it may be that the mistake was made of searching on the article title. --AJHingston (talk) 00:02, 17 January 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.