Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heterogeneous Missions Accessibility


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 18:26, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Heterogeneous Missions Accessibility

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A European project  (ESA in this case, not EC) that does not seem to have any notability in its own right.

all the references are either irrelevant to notability of this particular project/organization, or self-published. .  DGG ( talk ) 05:42, 26 October 2012 (UTC) Actually HMA is an initiative and not a temporary project: I will add details on following points: Pgmarchetti (talk) 08:31, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
 * partcicipants to the initiative
 * description of the standards addressed
 * formal referencing of the standards
 * keep new references have been added. Actually the body of text contains links to the HMA proposed standards which have not been listed under references to improve readability. Links to earth observations missions participating in the initiative were added. Pgmarchetti (talk) 11:41, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:36, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:36, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Ycoene (talk) 13:50, 30 October 2012 (UTC) This is a valuable description of an ongoing standardisation initiative (HMA) and corresponding consistent set of implementation specifications aiming to standardise an important European infrastructure. The GMES (which has its own Wikipedia page) has an in-situ and Earth observation (EO) component. The Heterogeneous Mission Accessibility is the process which is standardising the access to Earth observation component (data) of space missions from various European countries and Canada. In addition, the GMES is a European contribution to the global GEOSS which as well has its Wikipedia page. The HMA initiative Wikipedia page provides in a single location the information for interested people and organisations wanting to explore the adopted specifications oand to learn more about the solutions proposed by this ongoing and open initiative. A Wikipedia page giving a summary overview of the technical solutions proposed by HMA for access to EO data, and providing further detailed references certainly has its place on Wikipedia and complements nicely the information about GMES and GEOSS already present in Wikipedia.

Iosbkausl (talk) 17:06, 31 October 2012 (UTC) HMA ist not just a temporary project but an international initiative that aims at reducing interoperability problems between EO mission infrastructures and applications based upon international standards. As stated by Ycoene the communities that are relevant for HMA and support it all have their Wikipedia descriptions. Hence, an HMA description on Wikipedia increases the overall understanding of how may be interoperable by design. 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jenks24 (talk) 11:24, 2 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment. Due to the extremely similar way the keep arguments have been phrased, I have reason to suspect that there's some socking going on and have opened a case to investigate it.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 11:39, 2 November 2012 (UTC)


 * weak keep I do find some reference to this outside the ESA website, including some book references and a bunch of GScholar hits. It's unclear that what they say is enough to write the article from without using the ESA pages as the primary source. Mangoe (talk) 16:06, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Can you please list the references you found? -—Kvng 14:45, 26 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:31, 10 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment: A sockpuppet investigation has found that User:Iosbkausl and User:Ycoene were both found to be sockpuppets of User:Pgmarchetti. I'm striking through their comments accordingly.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 16:19, 13 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Found only one independent but not necessarily reliable source. Technical papers by members of the project aren't good references for establishing notability. -—Kvng 21:53, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 01:06, 18 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep (duplicate vote) I propose to start the discussion on notability from the list of references listed in the article. Can someone tell me what is wrong there? Furthermore can we have a look to the HMA disambiguation page. Wikipedia is very successful and is considered a reference from a lot of people. I think therefore that it should take into account as many entry as possible (of course fitting in the overall objective). I am a newcomer on wikipedia, so may be mistaken, however looks to me that this entry is as legitimate as many entries in the page.
 * As additional comment I want to underline that the comments of two persons have been banned from the discussion above.

Last point everyone is talking about crowd-sourcing, is this forbidden in Wikipedia? Thank you Pgmarchetti (talk) 15:01, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Are you a crowd? It's really not a good idea for a single purpose account editor to start going on about process; WP:BOOMERANGs may be incoming at any moment. Mangoe (talk) 17:53, 22 November 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.