Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SafeTRIP


 * 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. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:46, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

SafeTRIP

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable ephemeral project. No significant independent sources covering the project, does not meet WP:GNG. Crusio (talk) 10:41, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 10:54, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

This project describes the use of a new satellite bandwidth which is of interest to the consumer and research audience in the road transport area. As the project is relatively new, perhaps more time can be allowed for contributors to add to it. Ashweeni Beeharee (talk) 17:16, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment What you are implying is that at this moment there is not enough that makes the subject notable, but it will be at some point in the future, if all goes as hoped for. However, WP is not a crystal ball. --Crusio (talk) 17:20, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the notability of the project, the companies involved in it and their key presence in the ITS sector makes it interesting to keep a page on SafeTRIP and its main results. About the previous remark of it being of "ephemeral" nature, the SafeTRIP project will last for 3-4 years, and will encourage a wide developer base to contribute software for the open platform being put in place, during the project execution and afterwards. Finally, the wiki has also been improved by including references to relevant publications and linking it to other pages. Guillermo Grau (talk) 11:45, 17 August 2011 (UTC) — Guillermo Grau (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 00:53, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 00:53, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Notability is not inherited. If there are significant sources when the project finishes, you can re-create the article, although I doubt that will be possible because EU research projects like this one are hardly ever notable. Their results may be notable and the persons/companies/organizations involved, but not the projects themselves, of which there are thirteen to a dozen. --Crusio (talk) 14:16, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

You seem to hold a unhealthy bias towards EU projects (like this? what do you mean like this?) not ever being notable - which is a dangerous and unfair generic opinion. The project is already notable for being the only one to exploit a S-band satellite technology for vehicle that is readily applicable for mass deployment and application in terms of technology. The more time I was suggesting was to address what has been written so far in WP as it is not reflecting the notable work undertaken by the project. The project has strong links and involvement with the UN's ITU, NEARCTIS, etc.Ashweeni Beeharee (talk) 17:02, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, my "bias" is not just against EU projects, but almost any research project, be it EU, NSF, NIH, or other. It just happens so that EU projects seem to be the only ones for which people think they have to create articles. And I didn't say "never notable", I said "hardly ever", there may be exceptions, although i have yet to encounter them. --Crusio (talk) 17:33, 18 August 2011 (UTC)


 * WP highly helps in highlighting the R&D activities sponsorised by the SafeTRIP project in the domain of the communication technology and ITS, ensuring visibility to other researchers and stakeholders, and therefore leading to further improvements and exploitation of the results beyond the duration of the EU project. --Robecamp (talk) 14:07, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Probably, but WP is not for advertising, however lofty the goal. --Crusio (talk) 14:34, 22 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete without prejudice to future re-creation or incorporation of material into the W Series article if the project outcome becomes a real world application with the Eutelsat W2A satellite. AllyD (talk) 20:42, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BusterD (talk) 11:32, 23 August 2011 (UTC)




 * Keep Policy may say we should delete this but common sense says that editors have better things to do than debate, delete then recreate articles. We can afford to wait a few months or a year even and see how this develops. --Kvng (talk) 23:01, 23 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment I guess this is a proposal to delete WP:AFD? WP is not a crystal ball. --Crusio (talk) 09:05, 24 August 2011 (UTC)


 * What I'm suggesting is that the best solution for this article is to put official policy on the back burner for a while. --Kvng (talk) 01:48, 25 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. Yet another EU research project, described with unrealistic optimism about what they hope to achieve.  Yes, the only way this is going to be kept is if official policy is scrapped.  Wikipedia is not a free web host for dozens of inconsequential EU research projects. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:16, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Just a remark: Since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia for all (including the researcher), it could be interesting to have at least the definition of the project. It happens in my every day life that I am told about old projects which are of interest for me. Then if those projects are not active anymore, they could have stop their website and I am happy when I can find out some informations about them on wikipedia which is my first reference for verified informations. 194.214.173.64 (talk) 15:04, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I see you problem, unfortunately, WP is not a directory... However, the EU has databases for projects like this one, I assume. --Crusio (talk) 15:16, 29 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.