Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DARIAH


 * 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. JohnCD (talk) 15:31, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

DARIAH

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable project. One of a number of articles created in an effort to promote the EU Framework Programmes for Research and Technological Development. Hardly any of these have notability independent from their organizers/participants and this one is no exception. The article demonstrates this by talking about future plans, discussion the philosophy behind the Framework Programmes, etc., but nothing tangible about this project itself. No independent sources. Does not meet WP:GNG. Crusio (talk) 13:02, 22 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  — frankie (talk) 16:02, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions.  — frankie (talk) 16:02, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  — frankie (talk) 16:02, 23 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete It is near-impossible to glean tangible content from the article other than that there is a funded project involving a variety of institutions and that its preparatory phase has run beyond original expected timescale. Turning to the website for enlightenment, one finds "Just like astronomers require a virtual observatory to study the stars and other distant objects in the galaxy, researchers in the arts and humanities need a digital infrastructure to get access to and join together the information and the knowledge that is embedded in digital content." A debatable cosmic comparison at the least, surely. Anyway, in the absence of delivered outcome, this is non-notable. AllyD (talk) 20:25, 23 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Weak keep Being non-European and technically minded, I don't quite get this but I don't assume that makes it non-notable. Here's a mention in Wired. Don't delete this until someone able to properly assess it weighs in. --Kvng (talk) 22:30, 23 August 2011 (UTC)


 * The Wired article is a satirical column, pricking the solemn pronouncements of the DARIAH press release: "One quails at the awesome power of state-supported European digital culture" Entertaining column, but hardly sufficient to demonstrate notability of the project itself? AllyD (talk) 08:13, 24 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Noted but I daresay that's more attention than most press releases get. --Kvng (talk) 01:54, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Negative coverage is coverage, too (and should be included in a "criticism" section or something like that in the article). However, Crusio (talk) 09:38, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I have a bunch of edits too but still feel unqualified to make the call on this. I withdraw my vote and leave in the hands of the cocksure. --Kvng (talk) 22:01, 25 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. Yet another EU research project.  As noted above, it is full of patent nonsense like many such articles: nonsense, because its ponderous prose goes to great lengths to conceal this project's lack of tangible achievements:  The overall objective of the preparatory phase of the project is to move the initiative forward and be ready for the construction of DARIAH by late 2010. The preparatory stage is intended to set up the physical, strategic and human elements of the research infrastructure, and to ensure it is on a firm legal and financial footing. The work in the preparatory project addresses coordination, strategic, financial, governance, logistical, legal and technical issues, as well as management and dissemination activities to support this work.  Wikipedia is not a free web host for EU resarch projects, even if there's offsite canvassing seeking to make it one.  Being mocked for bullshit, even by Bruce Sterling, does not really make the underlying project an encyclopedia subject either, especially since his subject for commentary is not the project itself but rather the pompous and deceptive prose it emits.  - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:42, 25 August 2011 (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.