Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Galaxy Express Corporation


 * 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The result was Speedy Keep (NAC) - Nomination withdrawn with no outstanding oppose votes Shirik (talk) 19:46, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Galaxy Express Corporation

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  AfD statistics)

The organization's notability is in question. CSD was contested under the indication that "sources may imply notability." However that notability seems to be limited to a project which is scheduled for cancellation. This is in violation of WP:CRYSTAL. I cannot find significant coverage beyond this future (cancelled?) project. Shirik (talk) 17:53, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 02:13, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - The historical notability of the company is not dependent upon the success of the GX rocket effort. Even if GX is cancelled, the company is notable as being the first of its kind in Japan, i.e. the first privately led commercial-government space-launch partnership. Shirik may well be correct, that the listed sources may only imply this without explicitly stating it.  No doubt the article is imperfect; it is a stub!  What we all attempt to do here is improve Wikipedia.  So if anyone would like to improve Wikipedia, why not start by finding some good sources for this article, rather than deleting it? (sdsds - talk) 18:49, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow, please don't take the deletion nomination so personally. We are all here to improve Wikipedia, and while we might have differing views of what is best for the project, it's important to discuss those ideas instead of immediately going out and attacking bold actions. That being said, I only can go off of what I can see, and I lack the expertise to identify alternative sources of notability. If you have any recommendations I am all ears, but I can't really go out looking for notability when (1) I have no idea where to start and (2) the article only indicates notability from that particular project, which is inappropriate as discussed earlier. Shirik (talk) 19:37, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - In an attempt to justify rescuing this article, I attempted to find significant coverage of this company, but I am not getting very far. I tried queries such as this one through Google News and haven't really identified any content beyond one hit for the aforementioned cancelled rocket. Does anyone else have any good suggestions on search terms? --Shirik (talk) 13:59, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Consider trying a wider google web search, i.e. http://www.google.com/search?q=%22galaxy+express%22+gx (sdsds - talk) 07:25, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Even still, I'm having trouble finding a reliable source to site. That being said, the name is out there, as well. I'm on the verge of withdrawing this nomination to give the article the benefit of the doubt. I just wish I could get my hands on something concrete to justify it in my own mind. Unfortunately, I am not an expert in this subject so I cannot adequately interpret the sources that I am finding on my own. If someone could find a source for me (assuming that I am still unable to find one) and present it to me, I would be more than happy to withdraw this nomination and work on rescuing the article. --Shirik (talk) 08:02, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * To clarify, all I want to see is a reliable source that mentions something other than the GX program or a third-party source that explains why the GX program is significant despite its cancellation. --Shirik (talk) 08:06, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep appears to pass WP:CORP in my opinion. If it's true that their main project is cancelled and they fade into obscurity, that can be addressed if and when it happens. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  17:21, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, that seems reasonable to me. Withdrawn --Shirik (talk) 19:44, 20 December 2009 (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.