Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Landing footprint

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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) Darkspots (talk) 00:16, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Landing footprint

Landing footprint (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

It's just a definition, without much hope of expansion. Time to give it the boot. (Addendum} In fact, Wiktionary has a Glossary of atmospheric reentry where it would fit in quite well. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:43, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Keep There are may ways I would want this article expanded - How has the size of landing footprints changed over the years, what is the effect of landing in an atmosphere vs no atmosphere, statistics regarding past estimations of landing footprints and if they have been successful etc. Being a stub is not a valid reason for deletion in this case - but it needs to be expanded by an expert with sources. Fosnez (talk) 08:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. No, no, no, this is actually a very important area of study for every mission. Review of hazards, compilation of points of interest, (exo-)geological studies. The selection process is rigorous and frequently contentious. But this is more than just a technical term, it's something that can define the success of a mission. --Dhartung | Talk 08:28, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. I created the page after watching a video from NASA on lifting bodies - this class of aircraft spawned to research landing footprints. On Earth, we've gone from a big strip of water in the ocean (Apollo) to a small runway (Shuttle) : there's plenty to write about in between, but I've had trouble finding information. Pgxd (talk) 17:36, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep expand, and add references, but definitely keep.  Esradekan Gibb  "Talk" 14:53, 22 February 2008 (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.