Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guardian Angels for a Smarter Life


 * 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. Beeblebrox (talk) 07:04, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Guardian Angels for a Smarter Life

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Proposed project. Shortlisted, but not yet selected. If selected, will only start years from now. Only independent coverage in reliable sources is in-passing coverage in FT. Does not meet WP:GNG (nor will it in the foreseeable future and - if not selected- might never do so either). Crusio (talk) 08:20, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The page has ridiculous over the top promotional language about stuff that may never happen and bland PR blather:
 * "These devices will be intelligent, autonomous systems-of-systems featuring sensing beyond human capabilities, computation, and communication. "
 * "Many important European industry sectors such as health, energy, environment, transportation, and security will profit significantly from these technologies."
 * "The range of multidisciplinary research results will lead to the creation of new start-ups and hence of new jobs."
 * "The GA flagship project will show the feasibility and functionality of devices in three pre-defined generations of demonstrators. The applications are based on the concept of a smarter life, e.g. a lifestyle that benefits from the instant availability of relevant information, more interconnectedness between devices fitted with all sorts of sensors, and intuitive usability."
 * "Emotional GAs featuring high data security and enhanced personal control will certainly lead to novel societal paradigms that allow improved cognition, communication and prevention."
 * It has been clearly written by a PR person. Anybody asking this to be kept as-is is making a mockery of Wikipedia as an encyclopedia instead of a collection of press relases. Have mörser, will travel (talk) 09:03, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Postulated project with only prospectus-level deliverables at this point. Obviously an article can be recreated if and when it has proceeded into delivery and has clear 3rd party references of the benefits achieved (and by "benefits" I don't count the distribution of the EU funds around institutional supplicants). AllyD (talk) 10:16, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 22:42, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 22:42, 23 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. It might make sense to create a page for FET Flagship Pilots. That has more coverage: FT, but also Nature (There's a list of press articles on the EU FP7 site ). GA probably deserves a mention in an article about all the FET-F stuff. Of course, the guys submitting these pages to Wikipedia don't seem to care much about encyclopedic value and simply use Wikipedia as another venue for promotion. See also Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/FuturICT, another one of these FET-F proposals. Have mörser, will travel (talk) 07:08, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Both promotional and lacking in notability . Even after the deletion of almost all of the related articles on these projects, more keep being submitted, written in exactly the same style, by contributors who have done nothing else here. For articles as promotional as this one, talking about vague future generalities, G11 is probably the best solution &  I am likely to use it in the future when I encounter them. Perhaps someone can figure out who at the EC is responsible for this; it does not do them credit.   DGG ( talk ) 04:04, 31 October 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.