- 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. Sandstein 05:58, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- E-OCVM (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Article is extremely confusing, issues haven't been addressed in a year, only two incoming links, zero references. Prince of Canada t | c 08:19, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. As far as I am concerned, prose like this is patent nonsense: no reasonable person could be expected to make any sense of it. And while the article seems to be about air traffic control in Europe, it's actually — common approach to be applied by Research and Development organisations in support of the development and validation of operational Air Traffic Management (ATM) applications — about some kind of management theory for air traffic control.
The current title is a non-notable neologism as well; it should move to the expanded acronym, European Operational Concept Validation Methodology, if kept. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:10, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply] - Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:56, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment -- the content seems credible, but it needs a lot of work to get it properly referenced. Support rename to European Operational Concept Validation Methodology (retaining present name as a redirect). Peterkingiron (talk) 20:43, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:24, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as nonnotable; furthermore, I can't imagine why we would have an article written like this, unless it were a copyvio. Nyttend (talk) 20:44, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Reads like an essay, possible copyvio. VG ☎ 22:38, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete If it's not a COPYVIO then the author should apply for a job in the EU or some similar bureaucracy, because they are obviously a natural. I work in the aircraft industry, and I'm overwhelmed by the ratio of acronyms to plain text. To specifically justify the delete !vote, it's basically advertising for a EUROCONTROL project. MadScot (talk) 23:08, 17 October 2008 (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.