Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Applied Physics Research Group

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. slakr^\ talk / 00:55, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Applied Physics Research Group

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable research group. No evidence of in depth coverage in independent sources. Not even close to meeting the WP:GNG. PROD removed without improvement. Stuartyeates (talk) 18:51, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Very Week keep the scientific journals might prove notability but i'm not sure.--Jeffrd10 (talk) 18:58, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There are external sources available which discuss some of this research group's findings. Would that boost the credibility of this article beyond potential deletion? Pmriherd (talk) 18:56, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What we're looking for is in depth coverage, in any media, that isn't linked back to the group, their host institutions or their staff. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:02, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:16, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:16, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:16, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:16, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Research groups of this sort within university departments are almost never notable, and there is no reason to think otherwise of this one; the title is not distinctive, and there is no need for even a redirect. 65.88.88.208 (talk) 20:58, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Additional citations from external sources have been added to the page. Pmriherd (talk) 0:24, 29 January 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.180.48.6 (talk)

I agree that external sources have been added to the article, but they're not independent. They're things like patents granted to members of the group and popular science articles based on interviews with team members and reuse of team-members illustrations. Stuartyeates (talk) 01:43, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Northamerica1000^(talk) 07:54, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Appears to be someone's lab, started in 2001 -- that is to say, it's a dozen years old. So it's not especially long-lived, and I'm not sure that it's productivity stands out in quantity or quality. I'm not convinced that it's notable more than similar sorts of research groups, but I'm not familiar with the field to say. --Lquilter (talk) 22:28, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect, merging any relevant content, to University of Florida College of Engineering, where it's located. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:09, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, slakr^\ talk / 12:54, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Individual research groups are rarely notable. I was unable to find any in-depth, independent RS about this particular research group, so it fails notability per WP:GNG. Papers or patents by individuals of this group may contribute to those individuals' notability, but doesn't tell us anything about the the group itself; that is, notability is not inherited. In cases like this a redirect might be reasonable, but "Applied Physics Research Group" is such a common name for an applied physics research group that it would be unreasonable to redirect to a particular university department. "Applied Physics Research Group (University of Florida)" could be a possible redirect. --Mark viking (talk) 13:21, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not a particularly impressive output Aliceswift1998 (talk) 14:24, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.