Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/COMET (EU project)

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 delete. One two three... 20:25, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

COMET (EU project)

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

Yet another Eurospam article. Non-notable project, no independent sources. Does not meet WP:GNG. Crusio (talk) 22:39, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 22:47, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete -- I don't like the term eurospam at all, as it implies (to me) that anything to do with the EU projects is inevitably spam, yet some projects are extensive, notable and highly beneficial. (The Erasmus Programme comes to mind.) But in this particular case I don't see how the article can be saved. There are plenty of independent evaluations of unrelated projects called COMET, but I can't find any for this particular COMET. I tinkered a bit with the article to justify unPRODing it, but I think that at best, the material belongs in Training needs analysis or some sort of Support for SMEs article. --Northernhenge (talk) 23:23, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:37, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I absolutely don't want to imply, by using the term "Eurospam", that anything to do with the EU is spam (for what it is worth, I'm a huge supporter of the EU, which as far as I am concerned should get the Nobel Peace Price each and every year...) There are many things about the EU that are notable. Unfortunately, for some reason, many researchers involved in EU-funded projects seem to feel compelled to create a WP article about that (hardly any NIH/NSF/HFS grantee does something like that) and almost none of these individual research projects are notable in the WP sense. Hope this clarifies. --Crusio (talk) 09:17, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I see what you mean. Getting EU funding doesn't of itself make a project notable, and many (most?) projects are extremely small. --Northernhenge (talk) 20:08, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article and its associated website both say COMET comes under the EU Lifelong Learning Programme 2007–2013. That suggests a merge into that article would be appropriate. However that Programme's own site lists four sub-programmes, none of which is this one. Given its field of adult vocational education, it would seem closest to the Grundtvig programme, but again I can find no reference to COMET from that subproject. So unless some element of the Lifelong Learning Programme can be found that acknowledges COMET as notable enough for coverage within the Programme, it seems unlikely to be sufficiently notable for Wikipedia either, so delete. AllyD (talk) 19:08, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as lacking in-depth coverage by independent third party sources. Stuartyeates (talk) 04:59, 15 November 2011 (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.