Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Citizen sensor network

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. MBisanz ^talk 02:47, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Citizen sensor network (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Lack of notability, and bordering on original research. Prod contested in talk page. Vsion (talk) 03:49, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Interesting topic! But delete nonetheless because the provided sources do not establish notability since they can hardly be called reliable. The first reference has such strange bibliographical info that I can't tell what it is, the second link is dead, the third is a PowerPoint presentation by someone from a company (organization?) called Knoesis--very interesting, but not like reading an article in the NYT--and the fourth is a newsletter kind of thing from a company called Mogility. Couple that with the four hits for the phrase on Google and we have something really cutting edge that the world and Wikipedia just aren't ready for yet. In other words, not notable. Delete. Drmies (talk) 05:34, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete fails WP:N, WP:V, and WP:RS. Mister Senseless™ (Speak - Contributions) 06:14, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: an emerging paradigm in social computing research, a/k/a a non-notable neologism. Contains more words than information, as is typical of promotional gibberish, making much of this close to patent nonsense: Citizen sensing is an activity enabled by citizen sensors. A closely related activity to citizen sensing is mobile participatory sensing and people-centric sensing. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:53, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Added additional clarification in the talk page of this article. user:kgomadam. Please provide additional clarification. I am a researcher and I feel Wikipedia must have really cutting articles and that would enable Wikipedia to serve as a platform for enhancement. Further, people might add more references and what not. I dont think that the reason is convincing enough.

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.