Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oliver Daemen


 * 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 with no prejudice against renomination. Very many of the comments here do not get to the heart of the policy issues; how substantive the subject's role was in this event, and whether he's likely to receive more coverage in reliable sources besides details of his participation in this event. As such the discussion is fairly evenly divided between those who think the event is substantial enough that its participants require standalone articles, and those that don't; and the arguments have become repetitive to the point where I think a new discussion may prove more useful in the future, possible with the benefit of more distance from the spaceflight. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:39, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Oliver Daemen

 * – ( View AfD View log )

A textbook WP:BLP1E: subject is a teenager noted only for his trip into space. There is no coverage that isn't in the context of the spaceflight. There is no sustained coverage, because unsurprisingly the 18 year-old subject hasn't done anything else noteworthy yet, and we can't know whether he will in the future. Everything verifiable there is to be said about him can easily be covered in Blue Origin NS-16—and indeed already is—but my attempt to merge there was reverted by.

There are similar problems appearing with other articles connected to the same spaceflight. Going to space does not automatically confer notability. It doesn't exempt an article from WP:BLP. As space tourism becomes more common, we don't want to end up with endless pseudo-biographies of rich people where the only substantial content is "they once paid to fly really high". –&#8239;Joe (talk) 10:56, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep and speedy close, well, you'd think "subject is a teenager noted only for his trip into space" and being the first teen in space, would be notable in other places than Tiger Beat magazine and in the daydreams of swooning girls. Of course he's notable, as the youngest person to travel in space. I don't know what else to say, seems obvious. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:01, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * You might want to take a refresher on our actual notability policy then,, as well as WP:BLP. Notability is about sources, not simply asserting that you personally find the subject interesting. Specifically, sources with sustained coverage of a person's life outside of a single event that made them appear in the news. Otherwise we end up with pseudo-biographies about low-profile people that do no credit to either Wikipedia or the subject.
 * And take a look at Speedy keep while you're at it – there's no basis for one here. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 11:19, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * You may be right on speedy, just seems an applicable concept here, but WP:BLP1E does not apply. It states "If that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual" (then from the link: "A low-profile individual is someone who has been covered in reliable sources without seeking such attention, often as part of their connection with a single event." - the subject, as the first teen in space, would have known that the very act of getting on board would attract attention). And "If the event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented." First teen in space seems significant, and he has been already well covered in sources with further coverage just about certain. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:32, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * You're missing the headline: When an individual is significant for their role in a single event [...] The general rule is to cover the event, not the person (WP:BIO1E). There is no question that being the youngest person in space is significant; that does not mean we need, or that the sources can justify, a stand-alone biography. We can easily cover it in Blue Origin NS-16. We can cover everything notable about Daemen in that article, and we already do. There is no benefit to a superfluous biography that only adds his date of birth and what he plans to study at university. No benefit but arguably some risk of harm. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 11:54, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * The entire paragraph, bold added to show that the first teenager in space is separately notable: "When an individual is significant for their role in a single event, it may be unclear whether an article should be written about the individual, the event or both. In considering whether to create separate articles, the degree of significance of the event itself and of the individual's role within it should both be considered. The general rule is to cover the event, not the person. However, if media coverage of both the event and the individual's role grow larger, separate articles may become justified." And no, no risk of harm as defined in the essay. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:07, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Comparing the current version of the article to the information about Daemen in Blue Origin NS-16, literally the only additional information is: his place and date of birth; where he went to school; what he will study at university next month; and the fact that he is the eight paying customer on a spaceflight. Even accepting that these are biographical details of interest to most readers, are you seriously contending that the coverage of Daemen is so voluminous that this cannot simply be added to the main article? –&#8239;Joe (talk) 12:17, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:30, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:30, 31 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep. I'm not so much persuaded by the "first teenager" aspect; the line between being nineteen years old and twenty years old is a pretty arbitrary one. But there's no question that Daemen is the record holder for being the youngest individual to have flown in space, and going to space is still far from routine; we're not talking about hula-hooping here.
 * I can imagine the day will come when being the youngest person to have flown in space is no longer a notable thing, but that time has not yet come. TJRC (talk) 19:30, 31 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep Reasonably sure he satisfies WP:GNG.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:22, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Other than being a passenger on NS-16, Mr. Daemen has not done anything sufficiently notable to warrant an article about himself. The fact that he is the youngest person to pass the Karman line can be noted in the article on aerospace flight records. The fact that he was on the NS-16 mission can be noted in the article on the NS-16 flight. Other than that, we have no notable information to justify an article on Mr. Daemen. Fcrary (talk) 04:30, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - plenty of sources discussing him as youngest person in space, including naming him in the title. The notability comes from a single spaceflight but BLP1E requires all three conditions to be met and the third one doesn't apply here ( "If the event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented"" ). I expect that we'll soon get the first non-notable people in space in following flights. --mfb (talk) 04:58, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Won't we then get the argument that a person is notable for being the first non-notable person in space? Phil Bridger (talk) 10:17, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I wrote a comment on that but removed it before submission. Notability is gradual so the interesting number paradox doesn't apply, and "first to not have a Wikipedia article" is not producing notability so there won't be a paradox. Michael Masucci and Colin Bennett are two people above 80 km but not above 100 km who do not have an article, although the first one is likely notable enough for an article (as co-pilot). --mfb (talk) 01:20, 2 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep - as has been pointed out, not all the preconditions for WP:BLP1E apply. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  05:28, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * What about WP:BIO1E? –&#8239;Joe (talk) 09:03, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * We never have astronaut biographies on the pages about the spaceflights, so WP:BIO1E is inapplicable. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  09:22, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * That is an utterly bizarre argument. "We shouldn't follow policy because we don't follow policy"? Anyway, as I have already pointed out, literally all the biographical information in this article is already in the article on the flight. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 11:37, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * WP:BIO1E is a guideline, not a policy. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  00:32, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
 * And that means we can ignore it on a whim? –&#8239;Joe (talk) 06:13, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Then maybe we should shorten the description in the flight article. --mfb (talk) 00:38, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - Even though further spaceflights may become non-notable, he has been given sufficient attention from press and not all WP:BLP1E conditions are met here.Interesting Geek (talk) 06:08, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - Crew of the first crewed flight of a new spacecraft. Youngest person in space. Lots of coverage. Hektor (talk) 20:39, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - based on available news coverage. Peter303x (talk) 23:48, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete I think given the limited amount of information on Daemen besides basic biographic data, I think that passenger info should be included on Blue Origin NS-16. Liz Read! Talk! 02:21, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge to Blue Origin NS-16. Anybody really thinks that going to space for a few minutes when you're 18 is going to result in sustained coverage? --Randykitty (talk) 07:37, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - WP:BIO1E would apply that we should merge it, but that would clearly be a violation of excessive detail and WP:TOPIC. Also, he may continue to be notable and covered. Neil Armstrong was by the media for his whole life after the moon landing, and giving speeches. John Glenn had a ceremonial return to space in 1998. Also, Mike Massimino is an article, and yet he will never fly again and was not even a famous astronaut. The article is way better, more notable, and more has more views per day then Mike Massimino, and yet, we are considering deletion this article, and not Mike Massimino!
 * Merge with into Blue Origin NS-16 per WP:BIO1E. If there is additional significant media coverage of some other, unrelated aspect of his life, then a separate article may well be justified, and it will be easy enough to retrieve the text and restart it. But, at present, I'm seeing little additional detail beyond a few biographical statistics in an article about an individual notable solely for participating in a ten minute spaceflight at a young age, a fact that can be indicated in the "Crew" section of the flight's article, without indication of the other, trivial biographical detail. Tyrol5 ▸ [talk]  01:49, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I feel compelled to clarify my position in light of some of the other discussion on this page, recognizing that a "Keep" close may well already be on its way in relatively short order. I don't think the question is one of notability, as Daemen himself is now notable for having become the youngest person to fly to space, on a landmark private spaceflight, and at a time when spaceflight is still relatively uncommon, and having achieved a good bit of source coverage as a result. However, I find myself thinking that, while his accomplishment may have been significant, I don't see enough coverage enough depth of coverage of even his role in the flight to justify a separate article under the general principle of of BIO1E, the premise of which itself is notability. There are many, many sources asserting his status as the youngest person in space, but that is a fact of his having been involved in the flight, not so much specific detail relating his involvement therein. He didn't lay out the mission, he didn't design the spacecraft, and he certainly didn't pilot it -- the only role I'm seeing is the mere fact of his participation, having sat in the craft for ten minutes, without any significant coverage of any other role that might go beyond the scope of the mission article itself, and without any other significant coverage of any other aspect of his life. I recognize that, taken to its logical conclusion, this would suggest we ought to reassess the justifiability of separate articles for certain individuals who have flown or may fly into space but have little or no significant coverage of their lives as public figures otherwise. I think that's fine, and perhaps justified in certain cases. Tyrol5 ▸ [talk]  11:36, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * BLP1E does not apply to the article, as has been discussed, so the premise of this good faith nomination itself does not apply: "3.If the event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented". The event iis significant, Daemen's role is well documented and notable as one of the four NewShepardnauts, and his golden ticket onto the flight paid for much of it so it was substantial in two major ways (at a minimum). Randy Kryn (talk) 12:58, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I referred to BIO1E, the technically non-binding guideline, not BLP1E, in the spirit of common sense and IAR. In any event, my interpretation of "or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented" is that "well documented" is meant to refer to the depth of coverage, not necessarily the sheer number of sources that state largely the same thing, in a relatively brief and shallow manner. There's really only one thing that can be said -- that he sat in the seat and was the youngest in space -- contrast to, say the Alan Shepard analogy below, where his role in training, mission planning, his activities before, during, and immediately after the flight are very well documented -- and at more than a superficial level, far beyond what would make sense to include in the article about his suborbital mission. I appreciate that BLP1E is probably not cut-and-dry here, but my inclination is to err on the side of what makes the most sense from a content management standpoint in the present scenario -- and, at present (to me, at least), a separate article on Daemen adds little (a circumstance that could well change, if more coverage is offered regarding his activities and role beyond the scope of the Blue Origin NS-16 article, rather than a simple fact stated briefly). Tyrol5 ▸ [talk]  15:31, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge into Blue Origin NS-16. This brief spinoff was created before the topic was seriously covered in the topic for which he is known. The subject is probably notable but the article should not exist from an information governance point of view. gidonb (talk) 02:46, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * You say "The subject is probably notable...", and although you added a "but" that does not detract from his notability as the youngest person to travel into space and the first teen in space. Maybe space flight has become so accepted now that this historical landmark doesn't seem important, but the mission isn't named New Shepard for nothing. When Alan Shepard took a similar flight, America gave him deserved recognition. When a teen does it today that, as you say, "is probably notable". Randy Kryn (talk) 03:21, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * The comparison doesn't work. Alan Shepard was the second person to reach space and the first time the US sent someone to space. He trained years for that flight and piloted it. That's nothing like having your father pay to sit as passenger in a capsule for a few minutes. I think he is still relevant enough, but the situation is not similar to Shepard's first flight at all. --mfb (talk) 03:30, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * The similarity makes perfect sense. No matter how they got there, they went up into space and came back down. One was the first American human suborbital flight, the other the first space flight of a teenager. Both notable for their breakthroughs. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:34, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * There may be a problem with consistency and durability. If Oliver Daemen is notable (and should have an article about him) because he is the youngest person to have flown in space, what do we do next year? It's entirely possible that Blue Origin or Virgin Galactic will fly a 17 year old into space, which means Mr. Daemen's notability as the youngest person in space would go away. Should we delete the article when that happens? Or is having once been the youngest person in space still sufficiently notable? (This is not, fortunately, an issue for the articles on Mr. Bezos, Ms. Funk, or Mr. Titov, since they are notable for a number of other reasons.) Fcrary (talk) 03:39, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * We can cross that bridge when we come to it, although the first to do something usually achieves the notability entwined in the deed. As I mention above, Robert Heinlein spent a good percentage of his career writing about teens in space, and other science fiction creators have used the theme. The meme was put out there long ago for the generations that looked to Heinlein and others to fictionally predict the future. Oliver Daemen, no matter how he got there, has taken the first bite of that meme, and there will never be another "first teen" in space. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:51, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not convinced by that. Heinein's work and the meme you're describing were not about teenagers. They were about teenage children (i.e. legally minors, below the age of majority) As in juveniles still under the legal authority of their parents. That's what makes those stories and memes interesting and distinct. It sounds like you're making the difference between 19 and 20 years old a big deal (which it isn't), while the legal and social distinction (in the US and the Netherlands, Mr. Daemen home) is between 17 and 18. At 18, Mr. Daemen is an adult not a juvenile. Fcrary (talk) 04:01, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Yet still the first teen in space. And the youngest by quite a lot, seven years, as the youngest space traveler before him was 25 years 11 months old. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:29, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * As you say the word "but" does not infringe on the notability -- my first test -- but indicates that another problem exists. My reasoning is not one-dimensional and takes more into account than just notability (on which, btw, I am on the lenient end of the spectrum). I conducted two tests. In the first test I examine whether the article could be preserved by notability. In the second test whether it should be preserved by information provided in the relevant articles. The article on Oliver Daemen passed my first and failed my second test. Had it passed both, it would have been a keep. gidonb (talk) 18:14, 7 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep Many reliable sources discuss that he is the youngest person in space.Jackattack1597 (talk) 09:10, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Classic BLP1E, and that also applies if the 1E is somewhat unusual. We have long established that just holding a record (first / youngest / oldest X) does not establish notability on its own. What's notable is the event, the the flight he was on, and that has an article. He can and should be covered there.  Sandstein   15:36, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Being the youngest person ever to fly in space is a significant enough fact to be worthy of an article, especially given the context that very few people have ever done so.


 * 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.