Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vega launches

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 delete. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:06, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vega flight VV02[edit]

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Following this AfD discussion on articles about Ariane launches, I am nominating this series of articles about Vega launches as they similarly fail the general notability guideline as simple, routine satellite launches. I have exempted Vega flight VV01 as the maiden flight of the Vega family, Vega flight VV15 as a high-profile launch failure involving another country's military satellite and a historically large insurance payout, Vega flight VV16 as the maiden flight of Arianespace's Small Spacecraft Mission Service (SSMS), and Vega flight VV22 as a notable launch failure of a brand new rocket.

— Molly Brown (talk) 05:00, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to List of Vega launches besides the ones you listed above, the merge will cover them for general purposes.

Ask me about air Cryogenic air (talk) 15:22, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This AFD should have some deletion sorting so that editors interested in this subject are alerted to this discussion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:20, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spaceflight-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 07:42, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. While I understand the overall sentiment especially as other launch vehicle missions (Atlas, Ariane, etc) did not generate articles for individual launches, there is a clear tendency on the CRS (ISS cargo) missions to generate a unique article for each. For commercial crew, I understand desire for an article (crew interest, etc) but if these Vega missions were deleted, is there a view that the CRS mission pages would also be subject to deletion by the same notability criteria? If there is an editor that wants to generate the material and properly reference it, I am not opposed to it staying. That said, I am not a "hard keep" but would recommend consistency relative to missions like CRS. SpaceHist65 (talk) 06:00, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I feel that the comparison should instead be that there are no seperate articles for the Falcon 9 flights that launches the CRS missions, and that the launches are adequately covered in the articles of the missions themselves. In a similar vein, an article like Vega flight VV04 does not need to exist when the launch can be adequately covered in Intermediate eXperimental Vehicle. It would not be a consistency problem at all, in my opinion. — Molly Brown (talk) 14:14, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Everything we need to know can be in a list not separate articles Chidgk1 (talk) 14:02, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I admit I didn't look at all of them but the ones I did look at are lacking third-party sources. It looks to me like the tables in Vega (rocket) cover nearly all of what is in these articles, and if more is needed other columns could be added there. Lamona (talk) 03:28, 13 January 2023 (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.