Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flexible path

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 redirect‎ to Review of United States Human Space Flight Plans Committee. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:17, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Flexible path[edit]

[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)

this page does not pass the general guideline for notability Iljhgtn (talk) 22:31, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:07, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The concept does have recognition in the academic and space industry communities ([1], [2], [3], [4]). The article, however, is nearly unreadable and in need of WP:TNT. But deletion is not cleanup, etc., etc. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 23:35, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spaceflight-related deletion discussions. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 13:51, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:27, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or redirect to Review of United States Human Space Flight Plans Committee. The concept originated in this Review, and the sources that WeirdNAnnoyed cites above generally discuss the term only in the context of that Review. The concept therefore lacks independent notability sufficient for a standalone article in my editorial judgment. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 02:06, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Merge to Review of United States Human Space Flight Plans Committee. I don't think the topic is discussed outside of the review enough to make it independently notable and there's not enough sourced material in the article to merge it. Suonii180 (talk) 14:58, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:26, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

redirect the article may be used in future MICHAEL 942006 (talk) 05:58, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Review of United States Human Space Flight Plans Committee per above. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 14:01, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more relist given the late momentum in favor of redirect.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed,Rosguill ^talk 17:43, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Review of United States Human Space Flight Plans Committee: the sources cited above do not give individual notability to the topic itself but discuss it in the context of the proposed redirect target. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 17:43, 22 September 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.