Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Alsbury


 * 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 Keep. There is certainly no consensus to delete this. Keeping as a standalone article is the most favoured option, and a possible merge can be discussed on the article's talk page if anyone wished to pursue that further. Michig (talk) 16:02, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Michael Alsbury

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable per WP:BIO1E. I previously redirected this—also for WP:NOTMEMORIAL reasons—to 2014 Virgin Galactic crash (now VSS Enterprise crash), in which he died. But User:Mjroots asked me to take this to AfD, so here we are. Don Cuan (talk) 10:48, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Redirect to 2014 Virgin Galactic crash. Am surprised that Mjroots suggested to bring it here; as an admin he should know that redirects get discussed on talkpages, not at AfD. But as you say, here we are. And as you say, Alsbury pretty much fits WP:BIO1E exactly, but he's a likely search time and redirecting it to the accident's article would be the best solution. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 11:27, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 11:30, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 11:30, 19 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment - a look at the article's history will show that this was created as an article and converted to a redirect, which I undid, thus returning it to an article again. I've got no strong feelings either way as to whether or not Alsbury deserves an article. I'm happy for the community to discuss this. If the outcome is that it is turned back into a redirect, then that's fine, as is a keep outcome. Mjroots (talk) 11:38, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * So literally no-one is recommending deletion? cough WP:SK cough Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 11:45, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

—FlashSheridan (talk) 16:56, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * (ec) Merge to VSS Enterprise crash, adding the basic professional details into that article. Mjroots asked the nominator to AfD this as (from my reading) he believes astronauts have inherent notability and wants to keep the article. I'm not so sure myself, particularly as the article is largely cited to a single LA Times source and a search for additional material overwhelmingly returns hits to the crash (although that is to be expected). However, that's not necessarily going to be the case in a years' time, when other material may have come to light, so parking it as a redirect sounds like the best option for now. For what it's worth, I have "abused" AfD over "keep vs redirect" discussions (eg: this) per WP:IAR simply because it gets attention and consensus settled, while a talk page discussion can sit for months without input. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  11:47, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * That's about the sum of it, although I can see that some would say he was not an astronaut, but a test pilot (not necessarily auto-notable). What I object to was the arbitrary, undiscussed conversion to a redirect, which is why I reverted that edit. Mjroots (talk) 13:03, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - Someone who dies test-flying a spacecraft, whether he counts as an "astronaut" or not, is inherently historically important and will be remembered and written about for a long time. Gildir (talk) 15:04, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - Agreed, obviously—I initiated the article. Indeed, that’s part of the point to Category:Space_program_fatalities, which I fear is inevitably open-ended, but which will be long remembered.  I’ll also note that the seven (at current count) footnotes strongly suggest notability.
 * I'm afraid the number of sources has little to do with notability; rather it is the weight and reliability of them. That's also what WP:BIO1E also mentions - when an individual is involved in a single event but their life is otherwise undocumented, it's natural for the same story to be repeated in multiple news sources, which is what's happened here. However, ultimately the sources are all citing what is fundamentally the same event. (PS: Don't cite the Daily Mail; it upsets John and makes steam come out of his ears....) Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  17:35, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * For the record, it was not I who cited the Daily Mail; I carefully avoided it in print while living in Britain, and while it on occasion covers topics online neglected by other sources, I have some sympathy for the steam. But I don’t think the same objection applies to The Independent, Reuters (Science Daily), or the BBC, and will remain carefully neutral about the Los Angeles Times.
 * —FlashSheridan (talk) 04:48, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:28, 21 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep a pioneer in civilian reusable spacecraft. No doubt there will be a high school named after him within 10 years.--v/r - TP 05:58, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep joint winner of the 2014 Northrop Grumman President’s Award for Innovation-for-Affordability Excellence, along with many other Virgin Galaxy staff. Joint winner of the 2013 Society of Experimental Test Pilots Ray E. Tenhoff Award. Keynote speaker at a conference at the Society of Test Pilot Engineers Much coverage prior to the accident. Martin 4 5 1  00:30, 26 November 2014 (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.