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. Cirt (talk) 07:32, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DEEDS Project[edit]

DEEDS Project (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This is a page for a project at the University of Toronto. This article has several issues, but the reason for deletion is that it is clearly non-notable. After extensive searching, no third-party sources about the project could be found. Many universities have database/preservation projects, there is no clear reason why this one stands out to such an extent to warrant an article. Also, there is a clear conflict of interest - this article has been created by the user DEEDS.Education, a single-purpose account which violates WP:SPAMNAME. This is not a reason for deletion in itself, but it speaks to the fact that this project is not notable in the wider academic world, at least no more so than any of the hundreds of other similar projects in universities around the world. Since this is an academic project and not a business, I'm not sure if it would be considered spam, but it's close. Otebig (talk) 15:08, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as non-notable. COI is not a cause for deletion, but it should be noted that DEEDS.Education, according to their post on the article's talk page, is an ex-employee of the Project. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:30, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete No hits on gNews, but some academic papers stemming from it. Given lack of coverage in popular press as well as low citation count in scholarly works, I'm inclined to believe it is not notable. An alternative would be to merge it to something like Research at the University of Toronto or Academics at the University of Toronto. Madcoverboy (talk) 16:38, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as non-notable. --ElKevbo (talk) 16:57, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment it in actual practice does not seem to be a single project, just an umbrella. DGG (talk) 03:55, 26 April 2009 (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.