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. Due to low participation in the debate, undeletion of this article may be requested at any time via WP:REFUND. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 04:27, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

E-ScienceTalk

[edit]

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

According to it's blurb this project "brings the success stories of Europe's e-infrastructure to a wider audience." In other words it's a press office / awareness and publicity engine for other EU funded projects. None of the references amount to in-depth coverage by independent sources, many amount to entries in directories of projects; websites which are part of E-ScienceTalk or partner projects; or they don't even mention E-ScienceTalk at all. E-Science City, a sub-project of E-ScienceTalk was recently deleted with the rationale of "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." All of that applies to this parent too. Stuartyeates (talk) 22:47, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:14, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:14, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:15, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:15, 14 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, @Dipankan Upgraded! ^{Tag me!} 08:24, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

delete insufficient sources to meet WP:GNG. LibStar (talk) 14:27, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

important note Before this was relisted, a non-admin close was done. The closer was asked to reverse their actions and they relisted the debate but failed to restore the AFD tag to the article, which I have only done just now. Therefore a second relist may be required as the article was not tagged for a good part of this week. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:45, 25 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, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:21, 29 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.