Deletion of China exclusion policy of NASA

Comment: There is significant coverage of the article's topic as the "Wolf Amendment". Admittedly I did not encounter or search that term prior to the nomination, though I did make an effort to search for the China Exclusion Policy of NASA and other similar terms. It might be wise to look towards a movement of the article title towards what appears to be its , but it's clear that there's significant coverage, as established by {{u|Volteer1}} and {{u|BrxBrx
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Article titles (WP:COMMONNAME)

Comment: although perhaps a single sentence or two could be salvaged and placed in NASA and / or China–United States relations.  Overall this doesn't seem to have enough cohesive coverage as a single unified topic to justify an article. As it is this article has a y feel to it - taking a bunch of disconnected stories, tying them around public law 113-6 (which has almost no direct coverage), and giving it an intensely overbearing name to make it sound far more significant than it is. But public Law 113-6 has https://news.google.com/search?q=%22public%20law%20113-6%20%22&hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen almost no news coverage and its only impact seems to have been a single incident, which itself received minimal coverage and was quickly resolved
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH)

Comment: This has plenty of significant coverage in reliable sources, I don't think a good faith effort was ever made  it was nominated. As well as The Guardian and Scientific American sources in the article: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/oct/11/nasa-chinese-scientists-conference-banhttps://www.scientificamerican.com/article/farside-politics-the-west-eyes-moon-cooperation-with-china/, about 30 seconds on google gives me ARS Technica: https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/12/china-completes-lunar-sampling-mission-eyes-next-steps-on-the-moon/, Politico: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/12/20/biden-china-space-448529, Time: https://time.com/5954941/u-s-china-should-collaborate-in-space/, The Telegraph: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/05/16/safety-comes-second-chinas-race-space/, Financial Times: https://www.ft.com/content/8a6bb0c0-9a6f-46c0-8438-48984c5e32dc, etc. Not opposed to a rename, and this article could very clearly do with some work, but we really do have to stop with these silly AfD nominations of clearly notable subjects. &#8209;&#8209
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)