Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CDIO

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 keep. Keep based on articles found by User:Czar. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 01:14, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

CDIO

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

Several editors on the article's talk page note that it is not possible to tell from the article what the program is, and the article may be self-promotional. Spike-from-NH (talk) 15:26, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:19, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:19, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:19, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Yes, the article is the typical education sector hot mess, but we're looking at the notability and potential for the topic, not its need for cleanup. There are plenty of sources on the topic:

Crawley, Edward F.; Malmqvist, Johan; Östlund, Sören (2 April 2014). Rethinking Engineering Education: The CDIO Approach. Springer Science & Business Media. ISBN 978-3-319-05561-9. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)

Articles

"New programme to boost engineering education." TODAY (Singapore). March 20, 2013. LN

"Local universities adopt Engineering education model." New Straits Times (Malaysia). June 17, 2012. (origin, desc, expansion of framework) LN

Dearduff, Jeff. "CDIO: An Old/New Engineering Concept." Snack Food & Wholesale Bakery 100, no. 7 (07, 2011): 63. http://search.proquest.com/docview/877039024. (applications in bakery industry) PQ

Li, R., Y-T Wang, and Y. He. "Exploration on Reformation of Metalworking Practice Course Based on CDIO Training Mode." Zhongguo Minhang Daxue Xuebao / Journal of Civil Aviation University of China 30, no. 5 (10, 2012): 41-45. http://search.proquest.com/docview/1323228314. (analysis of college engineering instruction with CDIO) PQ

Guo, Jiao, Pei Yan, Hong Ying, and Xiaofeng Chen. "Experiment Teaching Reform for Computer Majors Based on CDIO." Shiyan Jishu Yu Guanli / Experimental Technology and Management 28, no. 2 (02, 2011): 155-157. http://search.proquest.com/docview/875085694. (CDIO in computer major syllabus) PQ

Chen, Wu Ying. "The Research of the Teaching Mode Based on the Concept of CDIO Architectural Design." Applied Mechanics and Materials 584-586, (07, 2014): 2753-2756. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.584-586.2753. http://search.proquest.com/docview/1567058126 (CDIO in architectural design) PQ

Conference papers (not sure if vetted)

Hsu, John C. and S. Raghunathan. 2007. "Systems Engineering for CDIO - Conceive, Design, Implement and Operate". 45th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit; Reno, NV; USA; 8-11 Jan. 2007. http://search.proquest.com/docview/29064172. PQ

Okay, that should be enough to show that there's enough to meet the general notability guideline. There are plenty more mentions for anyone who wants to sort through it. czar ♔ 05:27, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this reads like the boilerplate to a very badly written press release DocumentError (talk) 10:43, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The article is badly in need of a rewrite - the lead reads like ad copy (it even uses the mother of all tech puffery words, "innovative") - but notability has clearly been established by User:Czar above. Heck, just clicking the Google Scholar "Find sources" link establishes it. Kolbasz (talk) 19:06, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are you volunteering to rewrite it? If so, I'll change my opinion to "Keep." DocumentError (talk) 03:17, 28 November 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 21:53, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to take an axe to the article if you see fit, but the article topic's notability is not contingent on the current state of the article (AfD is not cleanup) czar ⨹ 23:16, 29 November 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 23:15, 5 December 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.