Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Puerto Ricans in NASA


 * 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 Delete. FT2 (Talk 18:17, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Detailed comment follows:

What NASA does, and what's suitable for Wikipedia, are two different things. NASA is a government body of the USA, that has made a policy decision to represent its employee breakdown to its constituency, the United States, because this suits its purposes. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, that has policies and practices outlining suitable content, and which differ from the needs of government to highlight specific national, cultural, or ethnic representations, or from the wishes of various groups to raise their profile. This AFD is based on Wikipedia policies, not NASAs.

Many "keep" and at least one "delete" arguments do not pass this test:


 * 1) What "NASA itself" does, or what NASA recognizes
 * 2) The comment by AntonioMartin that does not in fact advance an actual argument but only a statement
 * 3) "Where will it end" or "look at those articles there" - according to policy AFD's are basically discussed on their own merits, not by reference to what happened/might happen elsewhere
 * 4) Verifiability - verifiability isn't a basis to keep, if the actual main concern is failure to meet inclusion criteria in the first place
 * 5) "It's useful/interesting" - see WP:USEFUL, WP:INTERESTING, which have broad consensus at AFD
 * 6) "Wikipedia is not paper" - true, but this isn't a license to include everything, in this context this just means we often include things a paper encyclopedia wouldn't, not that we include everything or don't check further against usual inclusion criteria.

Finally three arguments that need more in-depth comment:


 * 1) "The proud people of Puerto Rico ... have a right to know about their contributions to the Space Program of the United States" - They may well learn their contributions, and should rightly be proud of them. But if the article is not suitable, no matter how interesting it may be, it belongs on a different website. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and there are lines over what is encyclopedic and non-encyclopedic content. Concerns such as national/ethnic pride, perceived insult of inclusion/omission, and "right to know" are not criteria which overrule established policies on Wikipedia.
 * 2) That a user feels strongly towards (and identifies with) Puerto Rico and seeks to advocate for highlighting of Puerto Rican people so that his children will see them promoted as role models - Wikipedia is WP:NOT, it is a neutral encyclopedia that contains information on remarkable role models and terrible ones alike and dispassionately. Wikipedia is not to be used to promote causes, whether for positive or negative purposes.
 * 3) That because individuals have received awards the group is notable - this isn't in fact a common consensus or practice on Wikipedia.  Awards might be listed in many ways, including (without prejudice) under NASA awards, List of NASA employees given awards, List of NASA award winners by nationality, or within individual biographical articles. You may want to see if one of those would be more acceptable to the community instead.

Looking at actual policy based views: Policy based delete views mostly center around:
 * WP:NOT - Wikipedia is not a place to collect arbitrary lists of information (such as cross categorizations of a kind not usually considered encyclopedic), nor (same policy) is it a place to self promote - which includes ones own social group and interests - or (one might add) a directory. There are broad concerns that WP:NOT is breached by this article. There are many kinds of factual information which do not belong in Wikipedia.
 * WP:NOTABILITY - that the list of "People from ethnic/national/regional/cultural group X who work at organization Y" is not usually considered notable per se. I concur. (Nebraskans in NASA? Mormons in the DOJ?) Raised by multiple users.
 * (Over) categorization - OCAT is primarily related to categories not articles, however this guideline reflects a more general communal view on cross-groupings, and should probably not strictly be applied only to categories. OCAT notes that in general people should only be categorized by ethnicity or religion if this has significant bearing on their career. This seems a valid concern. Not one person presented evidence that this is the case. Did these people become NASA employees or the award winners gain awards because they were Puerto Ricans? Not one contributor has tried to present evidence to make this case, and possibly this would be considered insulting. For most, their connection as Puerto Rico exemplars had zero correlation or connection with their jobs and (for award winners) their awards.

Against these concerns, the only policy based "keep" views I can locate in this discussion are not very well founded. They center around:
 * WP:LIST, which unfortunately is not policy, it's a style guideline. That doesn't mean it has no weight, but its primary purpose is to describe how lists should look, not whether an article based on one is suitable in the first place. Essentially irrelevant at this AFD.
 * An assertation that the list is notable. I would agree that it is factual, verifiable and probably has multiple reliable sources. But the debate seems to suggest that it is WP:NOT suitable content in encyclopedic terms, and "People from group X employed by organization Y" is usually not notable.

The fact that Puerto Ricans are included amongst the contributors, employees and award winners of NASA may or may not be notable; a group-promotion article, or list of them all in a biographical index is strongly contended not to be appropriate content. Notability alone is not enough. WP:NOT seems to be a serious, reasonable (and policy-based) concern of the "delete" editors... and the "delete" view also forms a significant majority once the comments based upon non-policy arguments on both sides are all set aside. My apologies for what must be a disappointing outcome to its creator and proponents. I have userified the page to User:Marine 69-71/Puerto Ricans in NASA in case its creator wants to use it elsewhere.

Puerto Ricans in NASA

 * – (View AfD) (View log)


 * Delete because the article is essentially a list of short bios of people of Puerto Rican decent whom are members of NASA and I believe that is in conflict with WP:NOT. Any salvageable content could be placed in individual articles for the people mentioned. I also just want to add that this is an article by User:Marine 69-71 and that though I deeply appreciate and respect your contributions to Wikipedia as overwhelmingly good, I do not believe this particular article belongs on Wikipedia. I hope you don't take any personal offense to this.--Jersey Devil 22:35, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable intersection of job + race per WP:OCAT Corpx 23:20, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per Corpx. non-notable intersection --Coppertwig 23:31, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep, Tony the Marine 00:02, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong keep- You people obviously did not read WP:OCAT. 1.) That's for categories. 2.) See the exceptions mentioned. Here, they are listed by both nationality and career. Although I agree such long biographies of so much individuals in a single article are unnecessary, I believe It could be turned into a decent list. I would be willing to do that, should this article be kept. -- Boricua  e  ddie  00:22, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Where exactly does it say its only for categories?  Lists should adhere to stricter guidelines than categoreis Corpx 01:09, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Ha! Obviously you did not read the page. It says it's for categories everywhere! Also, there is a guideline for lists; it's called (surprisingly) WP:LIST. -- Boricua  e  ddie  13:06, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong keep - Even NASA itself goes to length of pointing out Puerto Rican ethnicity of their employees in official communications Puerto Rico native Pedro Rodriguez named director of major engineering department at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center,NASA Engineer Opens Doors To World Of Science and others, and even has an award named for a Puerto Rican cartoon character Charles Scales recognized for efforts at Marshall’s National Hispanic Heritage month celebration. Puerto Ricans in NASA are a strong presence that is recognized by NASA as a discrete grouping. Nominator should have investigated more about the topic before placing for AfD. We do not take personal offense at WikiProject Puerto Rico, however, the topic is notable and we are not a paper encyclopedia. Go delete some real cruft, this article is encyclopedic and notable. Thanks!--Cerejota 00:29, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - Cerejota's comment basically sums it up if NASA recognizes it so should Wikipedia, why doesn't somebody takes a nice PROD tour trough all of those Robot Chicken episodes articles, that can be quite entertaining considering the large ammount of them. -  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  00:35, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment regarding the above "strong keep" votes this can be interpreted as a violation of WP:CANVASS.--Jersey Devil 00:40, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * From WP:CANVASS: "Canvassing is sending messages to multiple Wikipedians with the intent to influence a community discussion." He posted it at a Wikipedia talk page. That's not a vio. -- Boricua  e  ddie  00:44, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, see WP:CANVASS. One of the exceptions is posting a message at a WikiProject's talk page. Please assume good faith and read the guidelines carefully before accusing a trusted administrator of vote stacking. -- Boricua  e  ddie  00:46, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep, This not about an ethnicity! An ethnicity would be "Puerto Rican-Americans". This is about the people from Puerto Rico who have their own identity, culture, language and customs. Antonio Martin 00:58, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - Being Puerto Rican is much more than an ethnicity, unlike what most people think being Puerto Rican is actually a nationality, not all Puerto Ricans are Latino, we have Asian Puerto Rican of all kinds for instance, hell I am 25% Japanese myself and am still Puerto Rican. -  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  01:07, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Should we really have articles listing individuals of each race/ethnicity/nationality in every government/private organization? Corpx 01:12, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Of course. That's why we're here. We're not paper, so we can have every single bit of notable information without having to destroy the half of the Amazon. -- Boricua  e  ddie  01:15, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * We're not paper, but neither are we an indiscriminate collection of information Corpx 01:17, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * What is indiscriminate about this article? Thanks!--Cerejota 06:44, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Lists of people by nationality, who work for a company is indiscriminate, in my opinion Corpx 05:24, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Note to closing admin User:Marine 69-71 has been canvassing on user talk pages. See here and here Corpx 01:08, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Hum, according to what I gathered in your "talk page", you didn't seem to mind when others canvassed you (smile). Tony the Marine 03:19, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * People, please. Read WP:CANVASS before assuming bad faith. He contacted two people; like that's going to affect an AfDs outcome. Dios mío, a lo que hemos llegado... -- Boricua  e  ddie  01:13, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * How does that not make it canvassing?  Whether its two or 1000, canvassing is still canvassing.  Corpx 01:14, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * How does that not make it canvassing? Again, read the guideline, specifically the very first sentence, and you'll have your answer. -- Boricua  e  ddie  01:17, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * It is not "Canvassing", I notified two persons, not to ask for their vote or whatever. I states "to those who may be interested", which means that I have no idea if they are interested. If they are, then it is their option to make whatever determination which they see fit. Tony the Marine 01:21, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Not only it is not canvassing, the two people he contact are people he is in regular contact with over WikiProject Puerto Rico, because we provide some knowledge on the AfD process.


 * That said the policy is clear:


 * This is NOT canvasing as per WP:CANVASS:
 * Friendly notice (it was), Limited posting (two people), Neutral (not even a request for an opinion, simple notice of existence), Nonpartisan (no arguments for or against provided), Open (done in user talk pages, doesn't get more open).


 * This is an attempt to poison the well with insinuations instead of discussing notability and encyclopedic value, with sources, as have been provided. Thanks!--Cerejota 06:43, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - Were do lists of ethnicity related to careers end? Puerto Rican's in Law & Order, Chinese in Fast Food, Indians in Retail? Mexicans in Information Technology, Caucasians in the cleaning industry? Cultural diversity is one thing but isn't race relations all about getting away from segmenting people based on their race? Articles like this do nothing to help that. WebHamster 01:23, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete If there was an article about "Nebraskans in NASA", would it be noteworthy? For that matter, do we need articles about all the people in NASA, and where they're from?  While I can appreciate civic pride, articles about the places of origin of federal government officials are a case of too much information. Mandsford 01:29, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but how many Nebraskans have received an original award created specifically for them? -- Boricua  e  ddie  01:33, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment', There is diference between ethnicity and nationality. Puerto Ricans are the latter. Did you know that Puerto Rican is not a "race"? I'm sorry, but unfortunately segmentation is a reality in the United States. Tony the Marine 01:35, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Note The nomination is deceiving since it is not about people of Puerto Rican descent "per se" which would indicate an ethnicity, but of the people from Puerto Rico which is a nationality. Tony the Marine 03:11, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. This is incredible!  NASA, the aerospace industry and the top computer companies recruit 50% of the UPR-Mayagüez engineering graduates, making Puerto Rico one of the best represented jurisdictions in NASA's payroll, and now we're told that's not notable?  The main reason I contribute to wikipedia, now with over 50 articles and stubs, is because I want Puerto Rico's kids to be able to rely on wikipedia for their homework and I want them to stumble across all the notable accomplishments of those who stay in school, get good grades and become positive role models.  It is particularly notable that one particular ethnic group is very well represented in the professional staff at NASA... and by the way, no one has asked me to vote on this issue!Pr4ever 04:53, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * NASA recruits all kinds of graduates and not just kids from PR.  While noble, WP is not a motivational tool, but is supposed to be a neutral encyclopedia.   Corpx 14:31, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Note, The definition of "nation" does not only apply to an independent state. It also applies to people of common ancestry occupying a set territory. Can also mean people of diverse backgrounds joined together for a mutual purpose. Commonly a generic term for a particular country state. But can also have nations within nations as with the Native North American nations within USA and Canada. On October 25, 2006, the Puerto Rican State Department declared the existence of the Puerto Rican nationality (see: Juan Mari Bras). Puerto Rican nationality was recognized in 1898 after Spain ceded the island to the United States as a result of the Spanish-American War. In 1917, the United States granted Puerto Ricans U.S. citizenship without the requirement that the islanders renounce their PR citizenship. Since then, everyone born in Puerto Rico are both Puerto Ricans and U.S. citizens. According to Constitution of Puerto Rico, Article III, sec 5 which was ratified by both the government of the United States and Puerto Rico, the people of Puerto Rico are U.S. and Puerto Rican citizens. The proud people of Puerto Rico are not an ethnicity, that is an insult. Puerto Ricans have a right to know about their contributions to the Space Program of the United States. Tony the Marine 04:58, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * NASA is an equal opportunity employer, meaning that race/national origin did NOT play a role in the hiring of these said individuals, making this intersection non-notable Corpx 07:43, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Possible KEEP - If references to Puerto Rican employed by NASA (articles or other notability) can be shown in reliable independent sources, then keep. Maybe someone can research and edit it rather than delete? --BaldDee 15:27, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep As per the comments above, NASA does make a big deal of integrating Puerto Ricans into their NASA ranks, which I feel makes this ethnic-group-in-career significant. Furthermore as a point to all, lets try to keep AfDs more civil please, and keep our comments on the content of the article rather than the conduct of the users :) SGGH speak! 16:10, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Please don't take this as offense but we are not an ethnic group. -  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  23:01, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Re-pharsed, I have rephrased and revamped the article to make it clear that it is not about an "ethnicity". The article is includes short profiles and references which establish notability. Thank you. Tony the Marine 20:58, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong keep - per the comments above, SGGH, BoricuaEddie, et. al. -- David  Shankbone  19:28, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong keep per comments above and after changes implemented as a result of the above discussion. While the article should have been kept anyway, Tony's recent changes to the article have made this a no-brainer keep. --Alabamaboy 23:41, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Note to Closing Admin I just want to say the following. This issue about "ethnicity" or "nation" is not relevant at all to the deletion rationale. The reason this article should be deleted is because it is a database of mini-bios in conflict with WP:NOT. It is not something someone would find on an encyclopedia which is what Wikipedia is suppose to be. All of the "strong keep" votes made above are made on the basis of WP:ILIKEIT. Comments such as "why doesn't somebody takes a nice PROD tour trough all of those Robot Chicken episodes articles" are not keep rationales based on policy. Should the closing admin decide to keep this on the basis of such votes it will be a true determent to the afd process as it will make the implicit statement that rationales made on the basis of ILikeIt are on equal footing with those based on policy.--Jersey Devil 01:30, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Give me a break, I made myself clear when I commented, the last part was a comment with a strong basis to it. -  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  07:10, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Please note that not all of those who wish the article be kept are ILIKEITs. I agree that the mini-bios are unnecessary, but the article could become a decent list, for the reasons stated above. The issue about ethnicity is relevant, as it is an important reason for keeping the article. Also, if the will of the community is to keep the article, then it should be carried out and not ignored, as I think our rationales are pretty valid. -- Boricua  e  ddie  01:36, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Note to Closing Admin, I would hardly consider three sentences as in the entery of "María C. Lecha" a mini-bio. These are "not" mini-bios, which would contain date of birth, place of birth, the "early years" so on and so forth. The enteries only mention their accomplishments within NASA and therefore are very short profiles with job descriptions. Wikilinks are provided which will lead the reader to real mini-biographies. The article is referenced and properly sourced and written within Wikipedia's policy. Tony the Marine 02:32, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * This is not about ethnicity, but rather about making a list of people, by nationality, who work for any notable company.  Should we have list of Indians/Chinese/Japanese/Mexicans/etc etc who work for NASA?   NASA, as an equal opportunity employer does NOT take race or national origin into consideration when the hirings are made, so being "Puerto Rican" is no different than being an average American.   (Does this mean we should have a List of Americans in NASA) ? Corpx 05:27, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure we should have a list of "notable" Americans in NASA, as is the case with the Puerto Ricans in this artilce. Not all Puerto Ricans are listed just those who are notable. You are really making a big issue out of nothing. You already voted your oppose, so let it be and go on with your life. Tony the Marine 06:25, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * This is not "vote" per se, so my comments are not relegated to one part of the AFD, but anywhere there's discussion Corpx 06:59, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Every person highlighted in the article meets the notability requirements, its not like we are listing every single Puerto Rican that has worked for NASA, if it was like that the article would have exeded the allowed limit a while ago. I'm starting to believe that you have some kind of racial bias as a result of your "kids from PR" comment. -  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  07:07, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * If they do, then you should create individual articles for them.   As it looks now, all the citations are from nasa.gov - whereas notability must come from significant coverage from independent sources.   I'm not going to acknowledge to your assertion of racial bias with a response Corpx 07:16, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure why don't we do one better, since the reasoning to delete was WP:OCAT wich 1.doesn't apply to articles and 2.doesn' apply here since this isn't about an ethnicity, what is the policy based reasoning that you are going to put to support that delete vote? and I don't want any of those WP:IDON'TLIKE arguments like NASA contracts people regardless of origin or flacid reasoning like "hey we don't have a List of notable Americans in NASA, why should they?" I want strong policy based aruments that may persuade me to change my opinion. -  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  07:22, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Again, where does it say that WP:OCAT does not apply to articles?  You can look at "Trivial intersection" as "two traits that are unrelated" Corpx 07:25, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Again even if it did this isn't Over Categorization this isn't an ethnic group its a nationality, I can agree to the deletion of this under this rationale if we delete every article that involves "List of American something" or "American something something" then I will agree to the deletion of this as OC. -  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  07:31, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Do we have any articles that are about "List of Americans who work for " ? If so, I'll gladly endorse their deletion.   Corpx 07:37, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm still waiting for a policy supporting this besides that febble WP:OCAT interpretation to change my mind. -  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  07:39, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * "two traits that are unrelated" - Being Puerto Rican descent and working for NASA, as NASA does not take into account the country of origin when hirings are made Corpx 07:40, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * That's still dancing in the same roof, under that basis we can delete List of North American birds since birds don't take in account the region they are when flying over it. -  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  07:47, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * That analogy makes no sense to me as birds are found in suitable habitats, plus that article has independent sources attesting to the notability of the topic  Corpx 07:50, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Your allegation makes no sense to me either, this article may have problems with its format and it may need independent references but that doesn't justify deletion instead of cleanup, oh! and birds don't take that under consideration actually they are the first to migrate out of the habitats if a natural phenomena occurs.-  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  07:59, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but NASA is not a "company", NASA is an agency of the United States government, responsible for the nation's public space program and the article is not a "list" per de, but short profiles of Puerto Ricans who are playing an important role in the United States Space program. Tony the Marine 07:53, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Being a governmental organization should be no different that a notable company in this case.  Are people of Puerto Rican descent contributing more to the space program than people from other descents?  Their national origin has no impact on their contributions at NASA, nor did it on their hiring Corpx 07:54, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Really? then why is it so easy to find independent sources dicussing it? -  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  08:06, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Those are links profiling people who work for NASA, who happen to be Puerto Rican.  As I said before, I dont know how you can make a relation when NASA is strictly prohibited from considering race/national origin when hirings are made. Corpx 13:38, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * In the face of sources? Ignore them at your peril. Please read WP:IDONTLIKEIT, which is what your argument sounds like. Thanks!--Cerejota 00:59, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * They are not only profiles, all of the emphazize the fact that they are Puerto Rican and that their contributions are important to the agency and all of them speak of the importance of Puerto Ricans to the agency, hell one of them is titled: "Hispanic NASA Engineer Helps Space Station Crews Stay Fit". -  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  01:38, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Are you saying that a Non-Puerto Rican engineer is not capable of doing these said tasks?  They're employed by NASA because of their skill & educational background, not their national origin.   These are done by engineers, who just happen to be of a certain national origin, not done by engineers, because of their national origin Corpx 05:45, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Very Strong Delete This is an attempt to evade WP:N.WP is not a biographical dictionary. There would be no objection to an article on a subject including mention of people without articles, but to try to write an article about 20 or so less-than-notable people by lumping them all together in unencyclopedic. Those who are notable, should get articles--I think a w of them would be. This makes as much sense as having an article on all the people from Florida who work at NASA, with a paragraph on each. Website material, for NASA perhaps, if their PR people think it useful, but not for us. If anything, it perpetuates the idea that it is unusual enough for a Puerto Rican to work for a technological organization that it should be mentioned in an encyclopedia.I I also mention BLP concerns--do these people want to have bio paragraphs in WP--they are not notable enough to be included against their wishes.  f I were in the category, I would think it demeaning. DGG (talk) 02:07, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * If you believe that these people, among them the director of everything that is related to the environmental instruments which the United States provides to the European Space Agency in order to operate the MetOp, a European satellite that provides environmental information to both Europe and the United States.;  the Communications System Lead Engineer for the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) Mission,  the person in charge of the design of the communications systems of the "Global Precipitation Measurement”;   the person in charge of the development and application of multifunction control/display switch technology in 1983 and Development and application of a microprocessor-based I/O system for simulator use in 1984;  the director of the NASA program known as "Living with a Star/Solar Terrestrial Probes". satellite; the  pioneer of the development of position-sensitive detectors that will provide an order of magnitude more pixels (and thus larger field of view) than traditional single-pixel X-ray microcalorimeters and so on and so forth are less then notable, then I feel sorry for you. We Puerto Ricans are proud of our contributions to the Space Program of the United States and this article is written with the idea of educating the world that for such a small nation, we have made more contributions in proportion to population to the Space program then most States. I know, I know that there is a little gang that gets its kicks from deletions of articles and lists and that is something I guess that we will have to deal with Tony the Marine 07:44, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep, per User:BaldDee. - Mtmelendez (Talk 10:10, 29 August 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.