Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Westinghouse Astronuclear Laboratory


 * 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. Merging it can be handled editorially Star   Mississippi  02:27, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Westinghouse Astronuclear Laboratory

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

The former was de-prodded with the nonsensical edit summary "Please consider whether you could improve the article rather than deleting it". But I found literally nothing in an extensive WP:BEFORE. I decided to bundle the sister article as well for identical reasons. These existed, but there is literally nothing to say about them other than pages and pages of off-topic guff without a single source in sight. These articles have been stinking up Wikipedia for TWELVE YEARS without anyone even proving that a source could possibly exist, so it's time to nuke them. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:41, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:41, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:41, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Proof: The only results on Newspapers.com for "Westinghouse Astronuclear Laboratory" when searching Pennsylvania newspapers are classifieds or similar ads for jobs at the plant. The same is true of "Westinghouse Advanced Energy Systems Division", except for a couple police blotter entries which are still not reliable coverage. GBooks yields a couple of internal documents for the laboratory along with some fleeting mentions of it existing, but those are not enough either. Exactly what I'm supposed to improve the article with is a mystery. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:47, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. StarryGrandma (talk) 00:04, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep There is no doubt this was a real thing. The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information has an article about them at https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/4206644 And a newspaper.com search shows 775 Matches for "Westinghouse Astronuclear Laboratory".  When I searched for it without the word "interview" appearing  that cut out the advertisements for working there, and showed 365 Matches.  Mostly just minor mentions about things going on there, a long article about artists who work there doing artwork for them, and obituaries of people who worked there.  Anyway, the American government paid them to build nuclear powered spaceships there, and they do get mentioned in a lot of different newspapers in articles, not just ads.  I'd say that's notable enough for a Wikipedia article.   D r e a m Focus  00:44, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
 * "There is no doubt this was a real thing." That's not in question. And what part of WP:GNG do they meet in your mind? You flat out admitted all you could find was "minor mentions". Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 00:45, 10 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Merge Westinghouse Astronuclear Laboratory into Westinghouse Advanced Energy Systems Division, as the former became the latter in 1976. Significant coverage is fairly easy to find.

SailingInABathTub (talk) 01:10, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Relisting after an inappropriate early close by the nominator. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –&#8239;Joe (talk) 09:10, 11 April 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   18:03, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * So those sources are just going to add themselves now, right? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 02:37, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
 * If you want it done, do it yourself. You have so much time to around trying to delete articles, why not spend some time actually working on some instead.   D r e a m Focus  02:39, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment I don't think my merge was out of place. It's clear they're notable and both articles are about different incarnations of the same building, so a withdrawal and merge seemed like a reasonable choice. Nor do I think a relist was needed when I was clearly making an attempt to withdraw. That said, I'll let the discussion run its course. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 19:12, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * You can withdraw your nomination, but that doesn't mean the discussion automatically ends. See WP:EARLY. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 07:56, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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.