Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camilla Corona SDO


 * 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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 22:37, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Camilla Corona SDO

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Tried to merge and redirect to Solar Dynamics Observatory, but it was rejected by the author. Ultimately this is a non-notable thing that doesn't have reliable sources to establish notability via WP:GNG. It's a cute little article that belongs on sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov but is not encyclopedic or noteworthy to non-SDO folks. tedder (talk) 14:34, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Nothing on gnews, gbooks, gscholar and only social media on google itself. Does not seem to meet any notability guidelines. Merge will just introduce unsourced information the SDO article. Yoenit (talk) 14:55, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete There is nothing in reliable sources, thus mon-notable. Armbrust  Talk  Contribs  11:54, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Camilla Corona SDO is still a new EPO (Education and Public Outreach) tool. It is noteworthy to non-SDO folks since we use Camilla as a tool to get young adults attention, use her when we got into class rooms and during science fair and space exhibits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Romeoch (talk • contribs) 01:59, 16 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Do Not Delete - two third party sources have been added. One on NASA.gov and one on Thinkgeek.com. More to come. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Romeoch (talk • contribs) 23:09, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * While I applaud your efforts those sources are not enough to support the article. Both mention Camilla once and you can only use them to support the very first sentence (that camilla is the official mascot and a chicken). This is not significant coverage. Also, the NASA source is not third party, SDO is part of NASA. Thinkgeek.com is a blog and probably does not meet the criteria for a reliable source, but even if it does you are gonna need more than that single mention to meet the notability criteria. Yoenit (talk) 08:08, 18 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Do Not Delete If Wiki allows sport mascots to have their own articles, then it should allow science mission mascots too. Sports mascots are mostly for advertising/financial gain purposes. This NASA science mascot is actively used for Education and Public Outreach. Recent example; Camilla visited World Space Week in Nigeria in early October 2010 and participated in class room activities at an orphan kids school. There is no financial gain, but rather educational awareness is being promoted and sought. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Romeoch (talk • contribs) 22:46, 19 October 2010 (UTC)  — User: (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Struck duplicate vote. tedder (talk) 22:23, 20 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Do Not Delete As Wikipedia says "Ignore all Rules" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ignore_all_rules ; This article at a minimum maintains, if not improves, Wikipedia. Additional references have been listed. There will be more after NASA's STS-133 Space Shuttle launch, early November 2010. Camilla will be part of the event and media outlets will cover her participation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Romeoch (talk • contribs) 01:24, 20 October 2010 (UTC)  — User: (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Struck duplicate vote. tedder (talk) 22:23, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

October 21 update; additional reliable source added (Stanford University, Solar Center). Additional sources in works. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Romeoch (talk • contribs) 22:14, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Do Not Delete - this character although fictional is a valuable science outreach in the NASA branch. Deserves to be on Wikipedia even though it might not be viewed by some as important entry. It's probably one of the most ingenious tools created recently by NASA to help gather interest in science among young generation and what's even more important - it works. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.11.61.66 (talk) 20:37, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions.  -- tedder (talk) 21:13, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions.  -- tedder (talk) 21:13, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non notable. Why not start a Facebook page for her? Xxanthippe (talk) 21:51, 19 October 2010 (UTC).
 * There is already a Facebook page. Wiki doesn't appear to be social media so one doesn't exchange the other. People who want to know who Camilla Corona SDO is, should have a way of finding information. You cannot determine what is notable or not since every time one tries to learn something about somebody/something, it becomes notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Romeoch (talk • contribs) 22:38, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * A Facebook page suffices then. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:08, 20 October 2010 (UTC).


 * What's your rationale? Not everyone is on Facebook. So how can others learn about this? Sports Mascots are ok, why not Science Mission Mascots? Rationales please.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Romeoch (talk • contribs) 00:49, 20 October 2010 (UTC)  — User: (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Do Not DeleteCamilla Corona is not just some mascot to be deleted. She is a real rubber chicken who has inspired thousands to learn more about America's Space Program.  While it started with the Solar Dynamics Observatory, she now shares information about the people of NASA besides other NASA programs.  Camilla has a personality.  And because she is a rubber chicken who has a personality (and her own fashion designer who lives in Missouri), people find her engaging and fun and thus tune in to see what more she has to share and what they can learn about space (even if they weren't interested in space before).  Yes, Camilla has a Facebook account and a Twitter account.  But, since both platforms are for social media and an instant exchange in the here and now there lacks a concise place online to go and learn all about Camilla.  Recently Camilla visited the NASA Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas for astrochick training as her dream is to fly in space.  While at JSC for 3 weeks she not only met with many astronauts, had training in the simulators, and flew on the infamous vomit comet (sharing about the work that is done at JSC and highlighting the people and the jobs to inspire others to reach for their dreams).  The highlight of her visit from the perspective of how much can a rubber chicken get away with was when The Boeing Company in Houston, TX who hadn't heard of Camilla embraced her and her educational outreach mission.  They invited her to meet their engineers, managers, and vice-presidents of both the space station program and the new commercial spacecraft vehicle.  Camilla was invited to sit in the spacecraft mockup at Boeing, something only astronauts had done for the first time the week before.  Boeing even took the time to write an internal news story (which is posted here: http://camilla-corona-sdo.blogspot.com/2010/10/camilla-in-news-boeing-article.html) about her because she made such an impact.  The point is - Camilla is changing how we share and learn and she makes it FUN!  It doesn't matter if your 8, 18, 38, or 68 - everyone who meets Camilla is excited about how she makes a difference in the world educating people about the importance of space in our lives.  Why have a Wiki page?  That answer is simple.  So people can find her and learn more about her.  The Boeing photographer who was assigned to take pictures of Camilla and the executives had never heard about her and couldn't easily find information about her.  The photographer simply wanted to know who Camilla was.  This wiki page has started this off perfect!  Yes, it needs to grow, and it will as Camilla's outreach efforts grow.  Not only does Camilla teach others about space exploration, she is teaching us how to successfully use social media for education, how to hand off a rubber chicken from NASA center to NASA center with teamwork and dedication from employees who do this on their own time to share their passion with her followers.  Camilla will also teach us about the people who follow her and why they follow thus closing the circle and changing the dynamic of the interactions that take place on Facebook, Twitter, and in real life (as Camilla does make many appearances in public and was recently (or maybe still is) in Nigeria for World Space Week.)  So...with all of that I hope that the people at Wiki have the foresight to see what a game-changer Camilla is for NASA and for social media and to document this amazing capability and accomplishment.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.195.159.21 (talk) 01:09, 20 October 2010 (UTC) — User: (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * DO NOT DELETEI have met Camilla. The idea of her is an incredible education tool.  I have personally seen her involve all ages, tots to teens to those not counting anymore.  She teaches all education levels and is a great way to make new friends.  If her Wiki goes away, it will be one less way for her to outreach and open our world to communication and space education.  She is inspiring and a great asset to education. I am not connected to the space community and have learned a great deal from her.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toniakay (talk • contribs) 02:04, 20 October 2010 (UTC)  — User: (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Note essentially all the do not delete votes are from single-purpose accounts. Nergaal (talk) 05:06, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Correct, all the one from romeoch are mine (creator of the page) and added after doing more research on the topic. The others, as you can see by the IPs, are not from the creators. In order to make it easier, I moved all my comments next to each other. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.64.103.162 (talk) 14:04, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * (note the IP above is Romeoch) I'd guess the votes are coming from mentions on Camilla's twitter and facebook feeds. Facebook, for example, says "Wikepedia [sic] wants to delete my article due to the fact that they don't seem to have enough reliable sources stating that I am for real. " Unfortunately deletion is not a vote, SPAs (with poor arguments) don't cast much weight in deletion discussions, and the issue isn't reality- it's notability (encyclopedic quality). tedder (talk) 18:23, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I personally don't use Wiki so have never had a need to come to these pages or comment. However, when I found out that Wiki wants to delete Camill'a wiki page I was moved to instantly make the above (very long) do not delete comment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.195.159.21 (talk • contribs) 01:20, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. This page would appear to be about astronauts who adopted a rubber chicken as a mascot.  It would appear that rubber chickens may beat garden gnomes in the race to outer space, but I don't see the sources given here as the sort of reliable sources that would render this rubber chicken mascot an encyclopedia subject. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:27, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Article states, it is NASA's SDO (Solar Dynamics Observatory) mission mascot, adopted by members of the team to use it as an education and public outreach tool. The story line is for Camilla to travel to space to visit her friend, Little SDO (the spacecraft). Part of making this so attractive is that there is a real story line behind it. Several reliable sources (from NASA to Thinkgeek) have been listed and further sources are being put together. Again, if sport mascots can be listed, no reason why science mission mascots with educational tasks/duties can't be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Romeoch (talk • contribs) 17:18, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Romeoch, I'd suggest reading WP:GNG thoroughly. Aside from "what about article X" being a poor argument, the reason some sports mascots qualify for their own article is because they have reliable and verifiable sources. That means coverage by independent sources, such as newspapers, books, and (best of all, though rarely for mascots) scholarly articles. Poor sources would be NASA and SDO's website (because SDO has a clear conflict of interest in wanting coverage of this), press releases, blogs (thinkgeek) and other self-published websites, and so on. Further, it's important to have a depth of coverage as WP:GNG says. So a mention on a blog doesn't qualify, even if it was more reliable than a blog- that's the equivalent of a band being notable because of a gig listing. Wikipedia is not a place for all information on the planet. tedder (talk) 18:09, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Tedder, thank you! This has been the best argument so far with the most information to understand the issue at hand. Boeing will be releasing an article about Camilla and her purpose externally within the next couple of weeks and Stanford University will be doing an introduction on the Solar Center website. Both should be considered reliable sources. The fact that organizations close to NASA, the Space Program or Solar Physics are reporting should not be held against this article (i.e. NASA & SDO have a conflict but other organization, while using NASA SDO data, should not). One can argue that a sports team has a conflict of interest as well with its mascot and mascots, as you pointed out, rarely have a book or scholarly articles written about them. So it does become a fine line, especially when trying to to create a new program (let's call Camilla Corona SDO an educational program within the scope of Education and Public Outreach). At an early stage there is not all that much available (certainly no book will ever be written about Camilla Corona). But in order to provide the public with information, outside of social media, an article should be considered when the purpose of the character within the article is education and outreach, helping improve the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) knowledge of US students (and even abroad). It's almost like what came first... the chicken or the egg. My point is, deleting this page because the believe is that this is "non notable" or "nonworthy" is hard to justify. Not following guidelines is appropriate. As you can see we are working on bringing this into as good of compliance as possible. Deleting it would be a mistake, even at this current stage. Clearly, it's not just a pet/mascot/show trophy - it's an active tool used, taken to schools, to fairs, to space exhibits to capture the attention, spark the imagination. Thus the elaborate story of Camilla and Little SDO, their interaction with each other to share sun and space related information and Camilla's wish to someday fly to space. All part of a story line we can use to educate along the way. If NASA can do the out-of-the-box thinking, I am sure Wikipedia can too.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Romeoch (talk • contribs) 18:54, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a means of promotion, so don't try to use it as one. Once those articles come out (and if they provide significant coverage instead of a mere mention) you are can always recreate the page. It can be stored in the incubator until then. Yoenit (talk) 19:14, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The Camilla wiki page isn't self promoting the rubber chicken, it's talking about who she is and how she changes the lives of people. The wiki page allows a concise background of how she is changing STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) education and outreach.  Flat Stanley has a wiki page and um, that's a piece of paper.  I would suggest linking articles to how STEM is conducted and the issues with reaching K-12 students and getting them interested in STEM subjects.  The U.S. is in a serious decline of STEM professionals and will lead to the U.S. losing it's technological advantage without finding the right mechanisms to reach and excite students.  In Aerospace for example, those 50 and over far outnumber the number of people in their 20s-40s working in the field. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.195.159.21 (talk • contribs) 01:20, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment. It is not appropriate to use Wikipedia as a forum for promoting the interests of particular nation-states. Xxanthippe (talk) 03:28, 21 October 2010 (UTC).
 * It doesn't do that. It's like saying Donald Duck promotes Disney Company or Batman - DC Comics. What Camilla does is helping young generation to learn science in a new and funny way, regardless of nation, as any kid with an access to internet can ask her a question and I've seen them do just that. She's also becoming a popular symbol in space community. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.20.73.192 (talk) 16:11, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Do Not Delete Camilla Corona, in addition to being the Solar Dynamics Observatory's mascot, is an important figure in the "open space" movement. I know blogs aren't technically considered "notable", but in a field where blogs are your news source, I feel they need to be given slightly more weight than normal. Camilla has been plugged by SolarIMG and openNASA, and has served an important role on Twitter in educating thousands of people about our Sun. I also want to point out that this is NOT a single-purpose account -- I've been around on Wikipedia for over three years, just not incredibly active. Thank you for considering my viewpoint. Trvsdrlng (talk) 17:58, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * You are more then welcome to add your views to this discussion. I did notice you have no previous experience with article deletion. Mind if I ask what made you decide to comment in this case? With respect to your argument, whether a blog is notable is not important, it has to be a reliable source. Yoenit (talk) 18:30, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure. First of all, I don't know what your basis is for "no previous experience" is: I've commented on a few AfDs, but haven't been directly involved in any. Take that for what you will. Secondly, though I saw the notice about deletion on Camilla's Twitter feed, I'd been to this article a few times before that -- I'm a bit of a space geek. :) I commented because I think Camilla's mission of education about the solar part of our solar system is notable, as no other mascots exist for similar NASA programs. Thirdly, shouldn't WP:SPS apply in this case, so that anything published by NASA about Camilla would be considered a reliable source? If so, then I'd imagine that this Google search might turn up something relevant. Trvsdrlng (talk) 19:26, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah yes, my bad about the no previous experience. I jumped to a conclusion because you used "Do not Delete", instead of the standard "keep". Now, with regards to your third point: In order to demonstrate that Camilla is notable independent reliable sources are required. Also, if you look at the actual results of that google search you find only one mention of Camilla the mascot, which is already in the article. Everything else seems to be about Camilla the astroid and people called Camilla. Why should wikipedia have a page when NASA itself can't even be bothered to make a homepage for her? Yoenit (talk) 19:55, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yoenit, Tedder informed us that any NASA or SDO reference would be a conflict of interest. So the argument why NASA does or does not have, or intent to have a page specifically for Camilla, should not have any merit. If there was one, it's wouldn't be an independent source anyway. I do understand all your points, including the no-self promotion. I will double check that Camilla's article is written in a neutral point of view. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Romeoch (talk • contribs) 20:42, 20 October 2010 (UTC)  — User: (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * 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.