Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/E-Science City
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 redirect to E-ScienceTalk. Page history preserved for a possible Merge Mark Arsten (talk) 20:09, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- E-Science City (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)
Non-notable short-term funded EU project. Many references, hardly any of which mention the subject by name and those that do are either not independent or only contain a blurb with no in-depth coverage. We have a long history of deleting such projects at AfD, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/COMET (EU project), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PARSIFAL Project EU, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inter2Geo, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Scape project, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pol-primett (project), etc. Stuartyeates (talk) 17:48, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:37, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:38, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:38, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Yet another ephemeral EU project trying to promote itself. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 13:07, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —cyberpower ChatLimited Access 17:21, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete More blather from the EU's randomly-generated-word-salad grant mill. EEng (talk) 18:40, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge and redirect to E-ScienceTalk, of which this project is a part. Most of the content of this "City" article is already in the "Talk" article. I don't find evidence that the "City" project is sufficiently independent of "Talk" to have a separate article, much less notable independent of the parent. --Orlady (talk) 17:05, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge: per Orlady. Note: I see no hard evidence of Guillaume2303s accusation of WP:COI. And the fact that EEng doesn't seem to like the EU is not a reason to delete. -- BenTels (talk) 11:22, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Pardon me, but I have no animosity toward the EU -- I think European unification is a great thing, and the EU -- imperfect though it may be -- is the embodiment of that. What I don't like is, as I said, "the EU's randomly-generated-word-salad grant mill", which seems to have as a formal step of its procedures adding an article to WP on each projected project despite the fact that its own participants are the only people who even know of its existence yet. There are plenty of other sources of institutional blather -- US education is another -- but they don't make a habit of spamming WP on such a regular basis. OK? EEng (talk) 15:27, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Ok. That is still not grounds for deletion -- BenTels (talk) 20:35, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment on Comment Yes it is: Predictions of future goings-on no one's yet written anything about don't belong in WP. EEng (talk) 22:45, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Undoubtedly. But WP:IDONTLIKEIT is not -- BenTels (talk) 06:18, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment on Comment on Comment on Comment Um, yes, but as stated repeatedly that was never any part of my rationale. Can we stop now? EEng (talk) 15:37, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Undoubtedly. But WP:IDONTLIKEIT is not -- BenTels (talk) 06:18, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment on Comment Yes it is: Predictions of future goings-on no one's yet written anything about don't belong in WP. EEng (talk) 22:45, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Ok. That is still not grounds for deletion -- BenTels (talk) 20:35, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Pardon me, but I have no animosity toward the EU -- I think European unification is a great thing, and the EU -- imperfect though it may be -- is the embodiment of that. What I don't like is, as I said, "the EU's randomly-generated-word-salad grant mill", which seems to have as a formal step of its procedures adding an article to WP on each projected project despite the fact that its own participants are the only people who even know of its existence yet. There are plenty of other sources of institutional blather -- US education is another -- but they don't make a habit of spamming WP on such a regular basis. OK? EEng (talk) 15:27, 9 September 2012 (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.