Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christa McAuliffe Space Education Center


 * 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 no consensus, but certainly cleanup.  Daniel Bryant  02:46, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Christa McAuliffe Space Education Center

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Questionable notability, as per another editor's tagging of notability since October 2006 Guroadrunner 14:27, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep I added 2 articles from the Deseret News of Salt Lake City, which just meets the general requirement of "multiple independent reliable sources with substantial coverage." That said, it is a pretty impressive operation, with spaceship simulators to teach concepts in science and history to 16000 school children a year from around the U.S and around the world since 1990. The article could use a general rewrite from those and other sources, since it assumes too much familiarity with the subject. Edison 15:53, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) 14:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,


 * Keep per Edison Darquis 02:52, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: This looks awfully copy-and-paste-y. Does it come from another source? Are we looking at copyvio problems? Realkyhick 05:39, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Rewrite. I'm sure a reasonable encyclopedia article could be written on this subject, but this one probably isn't it. WarpstarRider 13:06, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: Copyvio! re: Realkyhick -- it appears that most of this article is a copyright violation. Please see the original article here: . Although it is not directly cut-and-pasted, about 90% or so of the sentences are directly plagiarised. Should we go ahead and add a copyvio tag to the article? Rockstar915 19:48, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I have reworded some of this article, although mostly to remove mild purple prose. I have also wikified it, so it at least looks professional. I have yet to check out the original article, but I am sure the situation could be remedied. Carrot  Man  17:59, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletions.  -- Noroton 23:09, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment First, we remove the copyvio passages, as is our obligation. (I'm working on that right now.)  Then, if anybody wants to rewrite it properly, they are welcome to do so.  In the meantime, if it should be deleted, it can be. --Butseriouslyfolks 02:26, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Most of the 'History' section was copyvio, but I couldn't find copyvios in the rest of it. (Although it certainly does look cut and pastey.) --Butseriouslyfolks 02:45, 2 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete While I expect there are sufficient sources to get past WP:N, most of the article fails WP:A. Once those portions are removed, there's not enough left to support an article. --Butseriouslyfolks 02:47, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Per statement by above user Butseriouslyfolks. Considering the need for a complete rewrite, fixing of copyvio, and lots of other issues, it's hard to see something good come out afterwards ("not enough left").  *Vendetta* (whois talk edits)
 * Delete per Butseriouslyfolks. Rockstar915 03:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Hmwith 10:08, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Has the potential to become a good article. A cleanup and more references would be a more constructive option. Camaron1 | Chris  15:07, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. It is easy to add references to support the notability of this center.  Yes, it needs a cleanup but that is not a valid deletion reason.  If kept, consideration should be given to moving this article and making this a dab page.  Yes, there apparently are two different facilities with the same name.  There is at least sufficient cited material to meet WP:A but a lot more work is needed on this article. Vegaswikian 06:26, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Its apalling to hear someone say "it's notable, but needs work, so let's delete it". How nauseatingly lazy.  We do not delete articles just because thay are not up to our quality standards, that's what the little "edit this page" button is for.  Jerry 19:05, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment re: Jerry. Please be civil. Rockstar915 19:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
 * reply to comment My remark was not "personally targeted", but rather was general in nature. civil <> nice. Jerry 21:52, 6 April 2007 (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.