Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Advanced Technology Solar Telescope

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. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:46, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Advanced Technology Solar Telescope

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Violates WP:CRYSTAL by stating definitively that the telescope will be built (and doesn't give a date). I recommend this article be deleted for now, and re-created after the telescope is actually built. -- φ OnePt618^Talk φ 05:20, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Google hits don't list a date for erecting the telescope either, nor does the source in the article that "should". Erpert (let's talk about it) 06:57, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Does not appear to violate WP:CRYSTAL, which says "Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place." While the consortium's website does not appear to list a completion date, a date (2017) has been reported in sources: see this in Christian Science Monitor and this in the Honolulu Star Bulletin. Astronomy magazine, a respected source, has reported in January the grant necessary to make it a reality. The project is listed as one of the major projects of the National Solar Observatory. Given that the "ATST design and development phase began in 2001" (says this scholarly article), this is hardly speculation. hamiltonstone (talk) 04:24, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand. Massive amount of media coverage, so sources are easy to find if you know where to look. This is not a candidate for deletion but for other maintenance tags, such as cleanup or merging. Nothing to delete here. Viriditas (talk) 04:27, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hawaii-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:56, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:56, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep—we should say "planned" instead of "will be built" if that's an issue, but there's plenty of technical coverage. Operations are scheduled to start in 2017. [1] Spacepotato (talk) 01:26, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per hamiltonstone. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 03:41, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- well covered in reliable sources. Reyk _YO! 03:21, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.