Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NASAcast

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 of the nomination was keep. Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 04:11, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NASAcast

This nomination is odd - I vote Delete based on WP:VANITY grounds; the author admits on her user page that she works for NASA doing programing and podcasting. I am putting this out there for comment - can government information be non-notable? Gay Cdn 12:59, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite and keep. It's a fairly major NASA outreach program. Government information can be non-notable, but only under fairly unlikely circumstances. I'm not even sure it counts as vanity- nationalism, sure, but it isn't promoting the author, close associates, or family of the author. Instead, it's promoting her government, which can be fixed with a cleanup. Captainktainer * Talk 13:46, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Government information can be non-notable, but not in the case of an agency like NASA that often has huge public interest. An army general writing about his specialty or a publicly funded scientist writing about their branch of science are just experts writing about what they know. There might be vanity involved as motive or vanity-like side-benefits of greater recognition and so more chance for the program to be renewed or expanded, but I don't think the Wikipolicy applies to that. I hope User:Allisonhazen puts effort into the article to flesh it out and make it encyclopedic. And I hope she improves the NASA TV article too. Just by coincidence, I was watching NASA TV earlier today (not the podcast though) during the second spacewalk of STS-121. Riveting. Flying Jazz 23:44, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notable and innovative program of a notable agency. I've wikified and cleaned-up the article a bit. -- Mikeblas 15:03, 13 July 2006 (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.