Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Digital Repository Infrastructure Vision for European Research


 * 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.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 15:03, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Digital Repository Infrastructure Vision for European Research

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Kinkreet (talk) 18:29, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete or redirect to Framework Programmes for Research and Technological Development. No independent sources at all. As usual, some of the participants in the project have produced some publications. That may help make them notable, but not this project. Any useful knowledge generated through the project can easily be included in the articles on these subjects. Just another article about just another European Union-funded research project (why don't we ever see articles on NIH- or NSF-funded projects?) suffering from the same problems that these articles have in general (see my notes on this subject). --Guillaume2303 (talk) 19:08, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:36, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:37, 29 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Another Euro-project projecting to provide flexible, scalable, integrated something. This particular project aims to deal with the Repository "Landscape" so it might better be termed, not D.R.I.V.E.R. but rather D.R.I.V.E.L. EEng (talk) 06:12, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete No evidence of notability, and without that all I am seeing here is the scoping document for a project. Wikipedia is not a project documentation repository (or "respository" as their site's front page has it); as others have noted, it only appears to be the EU - doling out the largesse to its client institutions - that seems to need this free hosting "solution". It hardly seems worth doing a redirect: maybe just a couple of sentences in Sixth_Framework_Programme along with all the other projects that have come and gone with minimal impact? AllyD (talk) 20:53, 29 February 2012 (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.