Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Responsible Research and Innovation


 * 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 keep, as improved. bd2412 T 01:27, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Responsible Research and Innovation

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

One reason I voted for Brexit is because my money is going on non-notable projects such as this. DGG thinks it is spam but it has survived four years so I will let it have this discussion. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:58, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete: I'm surprised it's survived for four years but I agree with 's assessment that it is G11-worthy.   SITH   (talk)   14:08, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete: it is unambiguous promotion. See also . JimRenge (talk) 18:36, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 18:28, 14 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep Over 5,000 hits on Google Scholar and in-depth news coverage indicate that this is one of those management terms that we really ought to have an article for. I have trimmed the article back (way back) to make a reasonable stub of it. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 18:44, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Having cut it down and added new material based on the academic literature, I don't see anything promotional in the article as it currently stands. It's certainly not promoting a product &mdash; just explaining a term that is roughly as opaque as any other that I've seen used by all scientific funding agencies everywhere. I loathe this kind of language roughly as much as anyone who has had to deal with those agencies, but that in itself isn't a reason to delete an article about it. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 19:29, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh, and with the old stuff cut out, Earwig's Copyvio Detector now finds no problems. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 20:53, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. DannyS712 (talk) 20:18, 14 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep: I'm sorry to disagree with the other editors who've suggested this for deletion, but Responsible Research and Innovation is a reputable academic discipline that not only gets EU funding but substantial amounts of funding in the UK from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council. It's about anticipatory governance in technology projects - ie the sort of ethical consideration that could (it is hoped) in the future prevent some of the data misuse and technological scandals that have become all too prevalent. There is a very solid basis of academic research, some of which is already cited here, and Research Councils are including requirements for Responsible Research and Innovation in their calls for funding from universities. For example it's included as part of the work on quantum computing that several universities in the UK are participating in. I am happy to rewrite the article, which I agree isn't very good, but it's definitely not promotional. Octaviapink (talk) 09:36, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for mentioning quantum computing! I found a few references on RRI in that field: . Are you aware of more/better ones? XOR&#39;easter (talk) 13:48, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep:The proposer says "One reason I voted for Brexit is because my money is going on non-notable projects such as this.". But WikiPedia deletion policy clearly says that "Articles on topics you wish didn't exist for personal belief reasons" is NOT a reason to delete a page. Responsible Research and Innovation is research area funded by the EU, UK research councils, the US National Science Foundation, and others. I don't care why you voted for Brexit. This is totally irrelevant to serious academic research, and your personal opinions don't come into it.Pingleresearch (talk) 10:45, 16 November 2018 (UTC) — has only contributed to the article(s) under discussion for deletion and this XFD page.
 * Keep: Next you propose to delete feminism or United Ireland because you are against? -- Oisguad (talk) 21:02, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment Oisguad, please discuss the nomination itself, attacking the nominator while also not saying anything about the article is not really a good thing to do in AfD. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 01:40, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, we expect deletion discussions to be about the article. But in fairness, we expect nominations to be about the article, too, and that they don't bring in the nominator's personal politics. "I voted Leave" is not an argument (nor, of course, are "I voted Remain", "I am above politics and refuse to vote", etc.). The substantive concerns have been addressed: news and academic sources demonstrate notability, we give due weight to criticisms/concerns so it can't be called promotional, and a top-down rewrite removed the copyvio text. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 13:57, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:HEY as done by . Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  15:20, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per the massive cleanup effort done by . WP:TNT accomplished. Brad  v  16:12, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Per WP:HEY and great effort from XOR who cleaned the article well. XOR also raises a good point. This nominator did not have to bring Brexit or politics up in this AfD, especially this coming from an administrator. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 18:47, 22 November 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.