Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fleet Systems Engineering Team: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Fleet Systems Engineering Team: delete |
|||
Line 13:
*'''Delete''' Sources included aren't really independent. Spawar helps design new systems for the navy and works closely w/ L-3. The house committee source is from the testimony of the spawar commander. I see that the user was in the navy (he was on a target, to boot) and now works for L-3, so he clearly has some interest and expertise. My suggestion is that he search out independent sources for the information provided. ''The Naval Engineer's Journal'' is a highly technical third party resource that may have an article on FSET installations. ''Seapower'', published by the Navy League is also sufficiently independent, so a promo story on FC's might work. ''All Hands'' is not technically independent, but is probably sufficiently so for an article like this. [[User:Protonk|Protonk]] ([[User talk:Protonk|talk]]) 02:29, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' non notable training scheme or organisation, article does not make much sense in either case. [[User:Doktorbuk|doktorb]] <sub>[[User talk:Doktorbuk|words]]</sub><sup>[[Special:Contributions/Doktorbuk|deeds]]</sup> 18:56, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
:* Meh. The article looks like it was written by a chief. It makes sense presuming that you understand the terms and admire some of the syntactical peculiarities of modern naval language. The article subject probably isn't notable, but there is a slim possibility that a concerted search through periodicals dedicated to the subject might reform that outlook. [[User:Protonk|Protonk]] ([[User talk:Protonk|talk]]) 20:32, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
| |||