Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NASAspaceflight.com

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The result was withdrawn by nominator. (NAC) Greg Tyler ^{(t • c)} 16:45, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NASAspaceflight.com[edit]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

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

~~No indications of notability, no references to reliable third party sources, I believe that this site does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:08, 5 August 2009 (UTC)~~[reply]

Withdraw: Well done for finding the citations as I could not. I would like to withdraw this nomination. The article is excellently improved now. Jezhotwells (talk) 09:19, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge- to Nasa.keystoneridin! (talk) 23:10, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely not. NASASpaceflight.com is not officially affiliated with NASA in any way.
— Ω (talk) 01:51, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: I posted a note on their forums, and Chris replied here with the following information:

“

Feel free to e-mail me at [email protected] - and just because we opted to use Wordpress as a CMS format does not mean we're a blog (and we're not a blog!) It simply proved to be a stable program to build the site on top of (and the site is actually professionally built).
Here's a couple of articles right off the bat as examples of mainstream media accrediting our news content:

New York Times: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F01E6DF1230F935A35753C1A9609C8B63

USA Today: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/space/2007-05-28-nasa-roller-coaster-escape_N.htm

We have a journalist at the NASA briefings. We have several mainstream journalists on site. I can request a server log screenshot for the visitor figures if required.

”

— Ω (talk) 02:56, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

References added to NASAspaceflight.com
— Ω (talk) 03:54, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep On the basis of the information now supplied. Merge is inappropriate, since it is not part of NASA. Well sourced enough to stand on its own. I suggest the nom read the current article and decide if xe wants to withdraw the nomination. DGG (talk) 08:27, 6 August 2009 (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.