Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EternalS Project

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. JohnCD (talk) 15:27, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

EternalS Project (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Non-notable project. One of a number of articles created in an effort to promote the EU Framework Programmes for Research and Technological Development. Hardly any of these have notability independent from their organizers/participants and this one is no exception. No independent sources (those sources present are presentations/articles by project participants, none of them are thrid-party publications about this project). Does not meet WP:GNG. Crusio (talk) 13:09, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.

• Delete. And, most of the articles created as a result of the offsite canvassing to promote these projects have a deeper problem than notability. They are created by the proponents, and as such tend to be written in very "forward looking" and promotional grant application bafflegab rather than English. They're full of grand unreferenced claims about what they hope to achieve, but are deliberately uninformative. This one is typical of the genre:
  
  EternalS creates the conditions for mutual awareness and cross-fertilization among the 4 ICT-Forever Yours - FET projects : LivingKnowledge, HATS, Connect and SecureChange. These projects are currently conducting research in key ICT areas: (i) automatic learning of systems capable of analysing knowledge and diversity with respect to their complex semantic interactions and evolution over time (e.g. diversity of opinions due to sequences of events), (ii) exploitation of formal methods for the design and networking of adaptive and evolving software systems, where security policies and fully connected environment represent fundamental properties of effective present and future systems. Thanks to the indirect participation of the above-mentioned projects, EternalS will actively involve many researchers from both academic and industrial world in its action. This will allow for (a) thoroughly studying eternal systems' dimensions such as diversity & time awareness and selfadaptation & evolution by automatic learning, in fields of relevance, i.e., Knowledge, Software, and Networked and Secure Systems; and (b) writing the roadmap for interesting and successful future emerging technology.
  
  It all sounds grand and technical and complex, like they're proposing a grand unified theory of semantic security whatnot, but all I got out of it is that they hope to hold more meetings sometime in the future. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:34, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment And when I read text like "there is growing demand for systems capable of evolving in time to meet future changes in the user requirements and application domains. However, time is only one dimension of the adaptability problem: time, ___location, legacy of decisions made in the past, and so on, are relevant aspects, where the diversity of the context plays a major role for the system ability of adapting to changes. Based on the awareness of context, systems must exploit the ever-emerging diversity of open environments, which also require the management of changes in their security conditions" I'd normally be thinking that an IT student had uploaded a term essay. But in this case it has the power of institutional, indeed multi-institutional funding behind it. AllyD (talk) 20:13, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment A substantial part of EternalS_Project#Project_at_a_glance is a copy from [1] which suggests there are WP:COPYVIO or more likely WP:COI concerns. AllyD (talk) 20:24, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The article is essentially documenting the framework for a research project; it has no evidence of notability in achievement. AllyD (talk) 20:29, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Perhaps something is lost in translation. I was going to suggest you get the ___domain Bafflegab.org, make up a buzzword-filled backronym, get a half-milion Euro project grant, and then cut-n-paste the proposal into an article, but there already is one. :-) W Nowicki (talk) 19:13, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 00:22, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

seems to me that the rhetoric used for these projects is unique and characteristic; I suppose it the idiolect of one particular PR agent. DGG ( talk ) 00:01, 25 August 2011 (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.