Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Apollo 13 Mission Operations Team


 * 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 merge to Apollo 13.  Sandstein  07:20, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Apollo 13 Mission Operations Team

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The bulk of this article is the citation, which could be on Wikisource. The rest of the article could be merged into the Apollo 13 article, there is not enough content available for a standalone article. Recommend merging any useful information into Apollo 13 article.  Kees08  (Talk)   23:41, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
 *  Weak Keep There are reliable sources which expend on the actions of the ground crew; for example, , also the following about the actions of President Nixon: ; and this which has a few summary references to the actions of the ground crew: . That might or might not be enough to make this into a more complete article, and unsure whether it is sufficient to meet WP:N, as many of these talk of the ground crew only in the context of the overall Apollo 13 mission (thus it might not have sufficient significant coverage as a topic of its own, though there are some sources which do treat of it exclusively); and some of the information available from the sources is probably too detailed go in an article about the whole mission. In the current state, the content could be simply merged, however AfD is not cleanup and with a more thorough investigation (what I found above is just from a quick google search), the article could potentially be brought to sufficient standards, so I cannot recommend a merge; even though this information probably should also go in the Apollo 13 article if it is not already there. 107.190.33.254 (talk) 00:44, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - Notable for having received the Medal of Honor, so it must be listed at that article (the "courage" was notable for the flight crew). Rowan Forest (talk) 01:45, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment Can't quite understand what you mean ("Notable for [...], so it must be listed at the article"???). Also, why Delete when nom suggests merge only (and merge is to an obviously notable directly-related topic)? Also there was never any question of the Medal of Honor (rather it is the Presidential Medal of Freedom, of which there is a picture in the article of it being awarded to the operations team and not the flight crew). 107.190.33.254 (talk) 02:34, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I think what Rowan Forest meant is that to delete this article and move the contents of this article into Apollo 13. If we merge, one of the article has to be deleted. (removed per comment below)OkayKenG (talk) 03:07, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * "Merge" is what you describe and it is a specific outcome different to "Delete". It usually requires leaving a redirect at the old page for contribution attribution reasons. 107.190.33.254 (talk) 03:12, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I agree. Totally forgot about that. Sorry. (also pinging ) OkayKenG (talk) 03:52, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * A one-liner does not need its own article (specially if unreferenced). Yes, delete the article and enter that info at the article Medal of Honor - if that format allows for a list of recipients. Rowan Forest (talk) 15:32, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I provided sources in my !vote to possibly expand the article - AfD is not cleanup as stated previously (we are not discussing article content, we are discussing whether the subject of the article warrants one); and this has nothing to the with the Medal of Honor (the award was actually the Presidential Medal of Freedom). 107.190.33.254 (talk) 16:07, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * The team was awarded the Medal of XYZ. It is still a one-liner that can be mentioned in the recipient list of Medal XYZ. Delete. 01:22, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note This user has now !voted a second time below; therefore striking previous !vote per instructions of WP:AFDFORMAT. 107.190.33.254 (talk) 13:35, 4 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment Edited your comment to add a Wikilink to the Apollo 13 page, hope that's okay with you. (so other editors could easily get to that page). Also if we merge with Apollo 13, merge most likely into the Mission notes section, as it already mentions the award given by Nixon to Lovell, Mattingly, The BBC does mention the team here. Just saying, the name of the article does not really even fit the contents. We don't really mention what they did to help return the astronauts. OkayKenG (talk) 03:52, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Yet another source which goes to sufficient depth about the subject, and it mentions a film about it too. Now seems surely enough to pass WP:GNG (even if it might need to be moved to another title - though unsure on that); and in any case, given the potential new content (which as I said, might be too detailed to otherwise include in the main article) it would work well as a subpage of Apollo 13 (where it appears to be barely mentioned). Changed !vote 107.190.33.254 (talk) 19:55, 23 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Merge. No sources, no content beyond 1) serving as mission operations team - belongs at Apollo 13. 2) Receiving medal of freedom - already noted in its proper place — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hydromania (talk • contribs) 07:33, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Signed your post See you're relatively new to this. Have you read these guidelines about which arguments to make or not to make in discussions like this one, particularly this section about surmountable problems? 107.190.33.254 (talk) 13:32, 24 June 2019 (UTC) Edit: fix ping 107.190.33.254 (talk) 13:33, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Meets notability, just needs some cleanup.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 01:13, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Merge Important and apposite material, but nowhere near enough volume to require a standalone article. Ripping this out of context and making it harder to find is doing the reader a disservice, if anything. (And I'm getting rather sick of "AfD is not cleanup" as a counter to merge suggestions in AfD discussions. Yes, should have been a merge discussion, but that is not a rationale for blocking reasonable solutions by process-wonkery.) -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 19:19, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   07:54, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge Has sources but not significant enough to deserve standalone article, but it can be kept and not much reason to not since it is sourced. -- qedk ( t  桜  c ) 15:11, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep I would think the coverage of the team from various media sources including press, magazines, tv,documentaries, movies (Apollo 13), Books, etc.. would make this team notable. Obviously this article needs to be cleaned up and researched but there are a number of members who went on to other notable jobs and accomplishments after Apollo 13. A list of people at top positions and notable personnel on the team should probably attached to give this article signifigance. You can look at the Apollo 13 in the media section on the wiki page and find enough references to make a case for this page. ScienceAdvisor (talk) 22:31, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
 * If you think a one-liner should be researched, referenced and expanded, then do it. As it is, is not viable as a stand-alone article -or even as a stub. Rowan Forest (talk) 00:34, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Comment Perhaps I will add to the article. But they are certainly notable enough for a page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ScienceAdvisor (talk • contribs) 02:16, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge the note to whatever article, if someone bothers to source that note al all. Rowan Forest (talk) 00:34, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment I have done some work to this page to bring it up to par with other articles. I still need to do a paragraph on the accomplishments of the team during the mission, which were considerable, and source the information but I think the page looks better already. Also people need to make sure they understand that the Mission Operations Team is aka as, and more commonly referred to as Flight Control. I agree with PlanespotterA320 and the other people who voted keep. They received the Medal of Freedom award as a group so this page should exist. They are notable and wikipedia does not recommend delteing pages which should be published because they are not up to par. This page could be added to a wiki project for clean up rather than deleting it. ScienceAdvisor (talk) 02:59, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your efforts thus far. One issue I have been a bit concerned with is that Mission Control is made up of a far greater list than whatever list you are likely to find. Any picture of Mission Control there is what, 30 or so people there? Times four shifts, that is 120 individuals. For the same reasons as listed at the List of Presidential Medal of Freedom recipients talk page, listing some but not all of the members undermines the original intention of Dr. Paine, which was to give credit to more than one individual. Other points brought up like members of the teams accomplishments after the article would belong in those individuals' articles and not here. I still think that any amount of material that can be generated on Mission Control for Apollo 13 could easily fit into the parent article. If we generate too much in that article, we can always fork it to this page in the future.  Kees08  (Talk)   04:18, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment You seem intent on merging the article, so I am not going to continue work fixing this one. Ultimately I thnk they received the award separate from the astronaughts and have more than enough press an media coverage on their own accomplishments to be recognized independently. They covered this around the clock for a week, made documentaries, books and movies etc. I think an independent page certainly is within wiki guidelines, and an existing page certainly deserves protection, even if it needs cleanup. I certainly don't have a stake in this page except for my personal belief, so let the group decide. ScienceAdvisor (talk) 13:51, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
 * The notability has been established, the issue is that it is a tiny entry that cannot support an "article" on its own. Rowan Forest (talk) 15:11, 4 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Merge Can certainly be mentioned in the main article; not an independently notable topic. Reywas92Talk 19:00, 4 July 2019 (UTC)


 * 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.