Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of scheduled rocket launches


 * 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 of the debate was Keep. Withdrawn by nominator. --F a ng Aili 說嗎? 01:16, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

List of scheduled rocket launches
Can never be a stable article, will require regular updating and is already out of date. Night Gyr 01:15, 2 May 2006 (UTC) Withdrawn, per discussion below. Night Gyr 20:08, 6 May 2006 (UTC) Look, this is great and valuable information, sure. But it's not encyclopedia material. Encyclopedias are for writing about events, not for listing events that may (if they ever happen) be worth writing about. Wikipedia is not a year planner. What next? List of future Rolling Stones comeback tours? List of films expected to be nominated for Academy Awards? Tomorrow's weather? &mdash; Haeleth Talk 09:05, 2 May 2006 (UTC) When I created the article, I cross referenced all information with the space agencies websites, and the SpaceFlightNow website. These only go up to the end of the year, and thus, so does this article. Seeing as rocket launches are not as common as, for example, aircraft taking off, your prospective rocket-spotter is more likley to need such a resource, as it is no good turning up at a launch site on the offchance there may be a launch today, as odds are there won't be. --GW_Simulations 18:12, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep It's not out of date as it goes up to December 2006. I can't see any reason to delete this, as it's very valuable and useful information for those interested in such things. Tyrenius 02:02, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * There are already resources for the interested, such as, and Wiki is not paper has a section on timeliness that states that it's inappropriate to write article that will turn out of date quickly. We'll need someone to update this article every time a launch passes or date changes, and that's not happening. Night Gyr 02:16, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, the list is ordered and clean. Although the list will continuously grow, so is the List of anime characters, List of South_Park episodes, etc, etc. Although I agree that there needs to be more people working on the article. -- ReyBrujo 02:52, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Those lists are not analogous. The analogous lists would be List of planned anime characters and List of scheduled South Park episodes.  I observe without surprise that neither exists, nor should either exist. &mdash; Haeleth Talk 09:05, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per ReyBrujo . In addition, this is a list collating numerous encyclopedic events, which have been externally verified. -- Saberwyn 03:58, 2 May 2006 (UTC) (Slight change and wordy explanation why later in discussion)
 * However, it's supposed to be pruned, so I don't htink it should exist in its current form. Are we going to move this to list of rocket launches and count launches that have already occurred? Night Gyr 04:21, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * There's only one that's occurred - all the rest are in the future. 2006, yes? However, I hope the information of launched rockets is being preserved somewhere. Tyrenius 04:30, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * There's numerous lists in Category:Space lists that can be used for these purposes. -- Saberwyn 09:30, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, although I must admit that Night Gyr raises a good argument. The table in the article is very succinct and provides useful information, but really needs to be updated with launches occurring moving to some article on launched rockets. --  Samir  [[Image:Canadian maple leaf 2.jpg|20px]]   (the scope)   धर्म  04:52, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep, the list is an encyclopaedic list which is useful and summarises events. The article needs to be updated frequently. --Ter e nce Ong 07:04, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, looks useful. J I P  | Talk 07:59, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong delete, WP:NOT a crystal ball, and this list is nothing else.
 * If the article A Bigger Bang Tour had been started in early 2005, with reliable sources, it would have been kept, or at least merged into the Rolling Stones article (This is still future events anyway, as the tour will not conclude for another four months. "Predicted Academy Awards nominations" would be (form where I see it) deleted as original research. I'm not even going to try and defend "Tomorrow's weather" as an article, as that would be a maintenance nightmare. Also, from the WP:NOT policy section on crystal ballism "Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place.". We have organisations that know what they are doing (at least in the case of NASA and the ESA, I truly hope so), saying that "We will launch this vehicle into Earth orbit, to perform this role, on this date". It is never going to be the case of *insert national leader here* waking up and ringing *insert national space agency here* one morning and saying "By tomorrow night, I want a rocket in space". These missions take time to plan and establish, and they leave a paper trail that can be used to reliably sourced this list. That's "certain". As for "notable", I don't know about you, but I personally think trying to put things such as environmental observation equipment, scientific projects, global communication transfer stations, and people into a location removed from the Earth's atmosphere is, if not notable, pretty damned significant. -- Saberwyn 09:27, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. To be honest, I'm not sure of the policies in regards to this matter. I feel that this list is encyclopaedic, and I myself find it extremely useful. DarthVad e r 09:35, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep The list is useful as a resource and as information to those who may wish to observe it. The dates may change, that is why the future tag is at the top of the page.
 * Suggestion Maybe this would make more sense on wikinews? JoshuaZ 21:15, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I also feel a transwiki'ing might be the best option, though where to...? Wikinews? Wikibooks? Grutness...wha?  01:02, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment -- I wouldn't have as much objection to it if we set some criteria like "list of orbital spaceflights" and then made yearly lists for those from 1957-2006, or possibly by decade if there aren't enough to justify individual years. The problem with it as it is now is that it makes explicit reference to the fact that its events must be in the future, so it will become out of date without regular updating.  A list by years can simply state the date and at the end of the year we can move on to the next one. Night Gyr 01:12, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I like that a lot, and a list of all orbital flights would be useful. JoshuaZ 01:18, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Is that the same as a list of all rocket launches? (for the non-astronomically inclined) Tyrenius 02:02, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Unless something goes horribly, horribly wrong, all 'serious' rocket launchers exit the atmosphere (i'd avoid making the criteria "orbital flights", as if something goes further than Earth Orbit, ie probes to other planets, future moon landings, they won;t be covered) If someone is willing to convert this to a List of extra-atmospheric vehicle launches (2006-2010) or somehting, I will support it. But, I would rather see this information kept and conveted. Under no circumstances is this to be interpreted as a deletion, if the conversion does not go ahead. -- Saberwyn 07:21, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree in principal to a limiting factor, and I would say that leaving the atmosphere would be a good condition. This will pick up all major orbital, sub-orbital, and planetry missions. --GW_Simulations 18:19, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Why not just "List of spaceflights" then, since spaceflight is basically synonymous with leaving the atmosphere. Night Gyr 21:05, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Fine by me. I would prefer to leave scheduled ones seperate from past ones though. --GW_Simulations 21:12, 3 May 2006 (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.