Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Orbitalcraft I


 * 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 delete: G3, kind of a G1 (it's not patent nonsense in and of itself) and apparently some sort of ridiculous trolling/vandalism. WP:SNOW seems to apply; likewise, creator has been indefinitely blocked per reasons at their talk page. Seems pretty obvious, but I have to insert the requisite "take it to DRV if you can find any sources" comment here. -- Kinu t /c  05:18, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Orbitalcraft I

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Looks like a hoax to me. No references provided, and nothing like this shows up on the Boeing website, nor BBC, CNN, or space.com Rlandmann 22:05, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as hoax Nothing turns up on Google News under 'boeing spacecraft' for this. An announcement by a CEO of this level would most certainly be there. It's not. DarkAudit 22:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as obvious hoax. Mmm... hoaxalicious. Charlie 23:52, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete A personal spaceship using nuclear thrusting technology which will be available in 2015. Really?  Gosh. Delete as per nom.  Flowerpotman  talk|contribs 01:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - external links are copied directly from the Boeing article, where (aside from spam) they have been unchanged for quite a while. No new announcement hidden there. Gimmetrow 01:14, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 *  Delete as obvious hoax Speedy Delete as obvious hoax Vandalism that is obviously ridiculous and not even remotely plausible - per nomination. No hits on Google for "Orbitalcraft I" or "Orbitalcraft I". - BillCJ 05:28, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * No need to waste time on a hoax. - BillCJ 08:10, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Hoaxes are not speedy candidates, per WP:HOAX and WP:CSD-G1. --Rlandmann 11:37, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Per WP:CSD: Hoaxes: Articles that present unverifiable and probably false ideas, theories, or subjects. Occasionally these can be deleted as vandalism if the article is obviously ridiculous, but remotely plausible articles should be subjected to further scrutiny in a wider forum. - BillCJ 23:10, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. I would never try to land a space ship while spiralling with a nuclear reactor under the hood.  Someguy1221 08:02, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete I wonder where you get your liscence to operate? Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 10:26, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Article says that Boeing announced this, but I culled through all the Boeing press releases and there's nothing, so I concur on the hoax assessment. Akradecki 14:44, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 *  Speedy Delete obvious hoax. Apparently you can't speedy hoaxes, which is stupid.  --rogerd 22:57, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The reason is that there have been times when what appears a hoax has actually turned out to be true, just obscure and poorly-referenced. This process gives the contributor (and other editors) time to make quite sure that the hoax is just that. --Rlandmann 00:52, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Understandable, but this guy hasn't even attempted to provide verifiable proof. Airbus's wishful hoping aside, Boeing is not an obsure company with poor PR. Remember all the media hype about the Sonic Cruiser and the 7E7 anouncements? Or the Virgin Galactic proposals? This isn't just a hoax here, it's blatant vandalism. - BillCJ 01:04, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * THe best judge of whether or not this is a hoax is if John Leahy releases a statement on Monday debunking Boeing's concepts. And if it is real, Airbus will relaunch the A350 as the A350XWR (Xtra-Wide Rocket) a year from now! ;) - BillCJ 01:12, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete. I'm going on a db-nonsense here. -- Dennis The Tiger   (Rawr and stuff) 22:51, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete looks like a hoax. The burden of proof is on the article creator. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 22:52, 20 May 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.