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) -Nahal^(T) 19:09, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of space launch system designs[edit]

List of space launch system designs (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Poorly written article with excessive information, most of them fails WP:GNG. I suggest deletion of the article. A replacement of that article is in draft. Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 07:19, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment – ​If you have already rewritten the article you can just replace it, no need to delete the history. – Thjarkur (talk) 07:57, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Actually, the rewritten version has different name. Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 08:02, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:00, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:00, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• KEEP Deletion is not cleanup. If you have improvements then make them, don't erase everything and then upload something else. As I said in the last AFD for this, "This sort of thing always gets ample coverage in reliable sources. Ample references are already in the article. Many of the things on the list even have their own articles." Dream Focus 11:33, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This is a notable topic and encyclopedic. WP:ATD. The article could use and ambitious editor, but not deletion. Lightburst (talk) 23:48, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Article archives the set of valuable information in the field. Deletion is pointless, rewrite and improved layout is required. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 02:29, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment You can go ahead and just put your version in the actual article, since it has much better formatting. But make sure to add sufficient sourcing though, as currently you have none. Just use the sources already present in the article. Sam-2727 (talk) 00:34, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This can be a notable topic for a list. While AfD can be cleanup, deletion itself is not, especially when there is a new draft pending. While we technically could decide on a redirect to List of space launch vehicle designs if that went live, it's not. At this point, it's better to incorporate into the existing article and do a move outside AfD if it's truly warranted. Kingofaces43 (talk) 16:34, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep No need to delete just to recreate, when a merger will work just as well and avoid losing history. If you don't want to do all the work yourself of merging the content and formatting of your draft with the content and references of the current article, maybe you could go to the current article and its talk page and propose there that your draft be merged in. And if the consensus turns out to be to not use your draft (for whatever reason) at least we'll still have the current article. – PointyOintment ❬💬•⌨❭  01:27, 30 December 2019 (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.