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. Killiondude (talk) 08:00, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Quiness[edit]

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

I'm unable to find sources which indicate that this is any different from any of the other thousands of research programs conducted. Given COI issues, it is likely riddled with WP:OR as well. My spot checks of sources in the "historical firsts" section couldn't find any mention whatsoever of Quiness. SmartSE (talk) 01:27, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:31, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:31, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Could not find any non-trivial mention of Quiness in sources provided, nor during basic web search. The funding program resulted in non-trivial scientific work but that does not make it notable in itself. Ariadacapo (talk) 08:43, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as mentioned by the nominator, a search for this doesn't reveal in depth coverage. And this article is currently a bit of a puff piece anyway. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:14, 25 February 2018 (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.