Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CLEAR goal criteria


 * 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 merge to SMART criteria.  Sandstein  07:47, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

CLEAR goal criteria

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable neologism pushed by various marketing consultants on their blogs and consultancy websites. A Google search revealed no promising hits, but due to the ambiguous term it is extremely difficult to search for it. Both given sources fail WP:RS. GermanJoe (talk) 05:52, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. GermanJoe (talk) 06:26, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Alternative search terms:


 * Keep . Try the above alt. searches that combine CLEAR and PURE with the older SMART criteria. If we just look at Google Books hits there are more than ennough to satisfy GNG.       Google Scholar is giving as well.   That last paper by Day and Tosey is cited by 47. Both PURE and CLEAR date back to at least 1996, so NOTNEO does not apply either. Courtesy ping . Sam Sailor 07:11, 2 July 2018 (UTC) --Amended below. Sam Sailor 21:43, 23 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment : I'm not impressed by the above list. For example, this cited source is from the Goal Setting for Success book that only mentions the subject once, and disparagingly too. Or take this book where the subject is mentioned only twice, per its index. The rest seem typical jargon-infested manuals that coach consultants. These are the sources that shall keep this SPAish-created text up? -The Gnome (talk) 11:22, 23 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment (1) - first of all many thanks for the additional hits. Still lots of false positives, but your search parameters are vastly better nonetheless. However, I have checked the listed links, and almost all of them provide only passing mentions or quotes of Whitmore's publication about CLEAR as an additional set of goals, but do not elaborate on the concept in significant detail. Such numerous mentions are a good argument against WP:NOTNEO, agreed. But without in-depth analysis of the term and its underlying concept these sources still fail to establish notability for a stand-alone article. The term exists and is used by some authors, but Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NOTDICT). For the sake of efficiency, I won't add a similar comment at the parallel Articles for deletion/PURE goal criteria just yet, but will wait until the discussion here is over. GermanJoe (talk) 08:29, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment (2) - would it be appropriate to simply merge/redirect a brief mention of this term into SMART criteria? All three terms seem very closely connected, both in research and usage as your list of sources clearly indicates. The articles already cross-link each other with significant overlap. Just a random suggestion, but maybe that would be a viable solution to preserve the information without the need for perfect "notability". GermanJoe (talk) 08:29, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   08:50, 8 July 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   18:37, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment (cross-posted to WP:Articles for deletion/PURE goal criteria): If this article is kept, it may be appropriate to create a navigation template for articles on goal-criteria mnemonics analogous to Template:Medical mnemonics. See also: List of medical mnemonics. How many of these goal-criteria mnemonics are there? I wonder if, who is the top editor of SMART criteria, would care to opine on this deletion discussion? Biogeographist (talk) 21:01, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete this corporate-training neologism that has evidently failed to catch on widely. The sources quoted at length above do nothing to change the lack of verifiable evidence of notability. -The Gnome (talk) 11:25, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect both this article and the article on PURE goal criteria (see WP:Articles for deletion/PURE goal criteria) into a new section of Goal setting titled, e.g., "Criteria" or . As noted above, the available sources are not good enough to support separate articles about these goal-criteria mnemonics. Furthermore, treating all goal-criteria mnemonics in one section of Goal setting will allow for more WP:NPOV treatment of goal criteria. Biogeographist (talk) 12:17, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I changed the suggested redirect target to per 's suggestion. Biogeographist (talk) 20:12, 23 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect both this article and the article on PURE goal criteria into a new section of SMART criteria. I would be OK with Biogeographist's suggestion.  However, the content of the PURE and CLEAR articles is more of a similar style to the SMART article.  That article already has a section on "additional criteria"; I would add a section called something like "alternative criteria".  Yaris678 (talk) 19:50, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
 * A merge into the related SMART criteria sounds like a fine idea for preserving the material. Sam Sailor 21:43, 23 July 2018 (UTC)


 * 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.