Deletion of Severn Link (2nd nomination)

Comment: Sure it never got out of the dock, but it was well reported on for several years, and it forms a useful short article about a failed business venture - easily meeting . I've given it a quick copyedit and added a couple more refs covering particular points. More could be added. &nbsp
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORP)

Comment: and expand to cover the wider topic as suggested by 90.244.186.38. Possibly rename to Bristol Channel ferry.  I don't think deletion is warranted, given the |usability of the existing content and the multiple reliable sources over a number of years
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Editing policy (WP:PRESERVE)

Comment: No doubt a worthy idea.  When planned, it was liable to fail under .  Having (apparently) never started, probably because the promoters could not raise the capital, in turn because the business case for it did not indicate that it would be profitable, the project remains a mere pipe-dream.  No doubt the concept, having never got off the ground is now dead and should be buried.  The multiple references in the local press are no doubt based on press releases by the promoters and are thus hardly independent.  I recall opposing articles on proposed stations in unbuilt light rail systems that had bene announced (proposed) but not funded as , the same applies to this; its failure to start means that it is now NN.  If someone can write a worthwhile article on shipping traffic across the Bristol Channel, which was once significant, we can no doubt have that.  Such an article might mention this project as an afterthought
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL||WP:CRYSTAL)