Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Method engineering


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was nomination withdrawn with no outside votes for deletion. --Sam Blanning(talk) 08:06, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Method engineering
This is not a Wikipedia project, but an unrelated university research project. Wikipedia is not a free web host (or suitable for original research, for that matter). Please pursue your research elsewhere. Sandstein 05:18, 11 April 2006 (UTC) Withdrawn, see infra. Sandstein 12:28, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Could you please provide (a link to) knowledge about what exactly is considered a Wikipedia project? Our research is nog original in the sense that it considers new thoughts or theories. Our students are triggered to update existing methods in the field of product software and information systems that are available on Wikipedia. This project page is mainly intended for all audience to provide a portal to all researched and documented methods in our field of research. I think that any audience, interested in this field may be assisted with such an index, that provides links to available methods in Wikipedia. If any other place on Wikipedia might be more suitable to position this portal, I would love to hear about that. Thank you in advance. Jurr 10:50, 11 April 2006 (GMT+1)
 * As per WP:PJ, "A WikiProject is a collection of pages devoted to the management of a specific family of information within Wikipedia. It is not a place to write encyclopedia articles, but a resource to help coordinate and organize article writing.". In other words, it's not for organising research that has nothing to do with writing an encyclopedia.
 * However, I must say that I am impressed with the effort that has gone into this project and with the quality of the articles. I have been somewhat hasty in labeling this as original research, as the articles do seem to be, on closer inspection, mostly encyclopedic. I was originally brought here by these articles, which do seem to be original research. As to the project itself, though, I withdraw my nomination. Please alert your co-contributors to please adhere to Wikipedia's policy of no original research. Best, Sandstein 12:28, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. I appreciate your attention to our efforts. It will only help us to become more correct in creating and enhancing Wiki's (our department intends to perform this project every year, during a course on the mentioned field of research).
 * I will address all authors to bear in mind the policy of no original research. Can I (or will you) please remove the nomination for deletion?
 * Regards, Jurr 15:54, 11 April 2006 (GMT+1)
 * An administrator will do so in due course. Thanks again for your project's contributions, which I find very interesting. Sandstein 14:52, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not so sure this deletion proposal should be withdrawn just yet. Looking through the articles there is a lot of POV, and little in the way of citations. I think the article set probably deserves to stay but there appears to be a big cleanup need. SP-KP 18:40, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Could you please clarify what your intend with the citations remark? Also, I am unfamiliar with the POV abbreviation, what does it stand for? I will do my utmmost to respond to your criteria as soon as possible. Regards, Jurr 21:11, 11 April 2006 (GMT+1)
 * Happy to explain. POV is "point of view". It's one of Wikipedia's strongest policies that content is written in a neutral point of view (NPOV). POV content is content that is not NPOV (See WP:NPOV). For info on citations, see WP:CITE. Taking Product management as an example, my reaction on reading this is - how do I know that this term means what you say it means? How do I know that another term, lets say "Co-ordination of output" (which I just made up), isn't actually the term that businesses use for this. How do I know that the elements you say are the elements of this are actually its elements? And so on ... Without citations I can check, the article could just be made up. On the POV front, it appears to present just one view. How can I tell this is the only view? Let me know if you need further advice. SP-KP 19:32, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree that many of these articles need cleanup or reviews of whether or not they conform to Wikipedia policies, as mentioned by SP-KP, and some may merit deletion. But that is hardly an argument to delete the project page that organises them. Sandstein 19:47, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Incidentally, I don't think that WP:NPOV is the major problem with these articles, except to the extent POV is inherent in WP:OR-afflicted content. I'd focus on bringing the articles in line with WP:NOR, WP:NOT, WP:V and WP:RS. Sandstein 19:51, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

I must admit that I am not very knowledgeable on the Wikipedia policies. Although I know of their existence, I haven't practiced them too much. Time for a change. Our motivation for publishing on Wikipedia stems from our intention to share our non-original(!) research with the world instead of just leaving our knowledge unshared and static. The problem moreover, is that our research group consists of about 60 students that we have to inform about the correct policy usage. I would therefore like to ask for some time to coordinate our students to perform cleanup wherever needed in the articles. Is there a tag available to indicate that cleanup is currently being performed? As for the project page, I would like to propose the actual retraction of the nomination for deletion, while I am confident that this Wikiproject answers to the previously stated policies. If you disagree on this matter, please indicate so and I will re-study the policies and cleanup the wikiproject page as well.

As a small add-on to the above, I would also like to state the following:
 * The wiki's that our students create are built as an evaluation from a liteature study, therefore it is not a research project
 * The wiki's are carefully created through a series of assignments, including peer reviews
 * All students will now be notified of the Wikipedia policies and their correct usage
 * For any background on this, please examine our educational website with the assignments stated

I sincerely hope that this information will add to your opinion of our work. Regards, Jurr 22:42, 11 April 2006 (GMT+1)


 * I have replied on the project's talk page. You may want to point your students there. Sandstein 05:25, 12 April 2006 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.