Talk:Pacific Seacraft

This article was nominated for deletion on 10 November 2011. The result of the discussion was nomination withdrawn.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Sailing Mid‑importance

	Pacific Seacraft is within the scope of the WikiProject Sailing, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Sailing. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.SailingWikipedia:WikiProject SailingTemplate:WikiProject SailingSailing articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Companies

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Notability

The article is currently a mere list of models and brands, offering nothing to the reader about what the company is like or why it has a page at all. — Saxifrage ✎ 17:44, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am a page designer at The News & Observer in Raleigh, North Carolina. As I was scouring the 'net to possibly find a mugshot of Mr. Brodie I discovered this Wikipedia entry. I supplemented the entry from the story that Tim Simmons wrote that day. Dpittman69 02:22, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just removed the proposed deletion tag. This is a well known and influential boat builder in the world of cruising sailboats. It was named one of America's best products by fortune magazine and I added a reference to that. It needs cleanup and further citations but it should not be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asdf39 (talk • contribs) 13:48, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On my list of things to do

I see this article has been tagged as possibly unnotable. I just want to note its on my list of things to do now. Between its listing in "World best Sailboats" and its making Fotune Magazines 100 Best Products twice, it is certainly notable for inclusion (there are lesser yacht builders on wikipedia). Cant promise I am going to get around to it soon though, but if anyone gets trigger happy and puts it up for AfD please leave me a note an I will make it a priority! Russeasby 02:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the "Fortune" award can be counted as a proof of notability. However, please add a precise reference to Fortune magazine (issue, date, page, etc.; I didn't find it by a quick Google search). Also, the "laundry lists" should be cleaned up. Will change tags accordingly. Sorted as part of the Notability wikiproject. --B. Wolterding 18:40, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just added a reference to the fortune award and removed the deletion tag. This article needs cleanup and citations but certainly not deletion Asdf39 (talk) 13:52, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The reference you added was a Pacific Seacraft advertisement with potentially out of context quotes from Fortune, not the Fortune article. An online copy of the table of contents indicates that if Pacific Seacraft is mentioned, it is only in passing. The general notability guidelines requires significant coverage from reliable secondary sources independent of the subject. There are not any sources demonstrating notability yet. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:17, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As stated in the notability guidelines, issues with lack of citation are separate from notability. Notability requires that sources exist, not that they necessarily have to be cited in the article. In this case much of the coverage surrounds Pacific Seacraft's individual boats which makes finding articles on the company itself a challenge but doesn't diminish Pacific Seacraft's notability as their builder. Examples of notable coverage of their boats include the following (a quick list). These combined with the fortune reference, combined with the sentiments of other users on this talk page add up to the fact that this article meets the notability requirements of wikipedia. As a sailor, long time and regular wikipedia user and sometime editor, it would be terribly inconsistent for this article to be deleted.

https://sailboat.guide/blue-water-boats (5 boats cited, more than any other builder)

http://www.sailingmagazine.net/boats/retrofits/730-dana-24

http://www.sailamerica.com/halloffame/inductees.asp

http://www.sailingmagazine.net/boats/6-used-boat-notebook/552-pacific-seacraft-37

Company Coverage:

http://www.cruisingworld.com/news/pacific-seacraft-will-sail-again — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asdf39 (talk • contribs) 03:05, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While the guidelines require that the sources only exist (and not that they be cited), the articles must still be presented to show that they exist. Pacific Seacraft's claim to having been given an award by Fortune has not been demonstrated, and it has not been demonstrated that the mention was not in passing. If someone would actually present that issue instead of just repeating second-hand claims, then that might work.

Notability is not inherited, so the reviews for individual models do not demonstrate notability.

The Bluewaterboats citation is a user-generated source and so doesn't meet WP:RS.

As for sentiments, "I like it" is not an argument for inclusion.

The Cruising world citation does work, though.

Ian.thomson (talk) 13:13, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]