Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cooperative Commons

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. Lack of sources to show notability for this specific project. No prejudice against creating an article about the idea generally if there are sources for that, but I assume that would belong at Cooperative commons rather than the capitalization used for the name of this specific project. RL0919 (talk) 21:26, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cooperative Commons

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This article seems to be about a specific business initiative by a specific organization. After searching via news, newspapers, books, scholar and JSTOR, nothing came up that I could leverage as an RS source about this topic. I did find something about Legacoop, but not this initiative. I also found that this is not the only cooperative commons, this is just a specific example of one that one organization was building. Did it come to fruition? Has it had impact in the community it intended to serve? I don't know because RS information hasn't appeared in my searches. It seems to be both an issue of notability and verifiability.

To be retained, the article should reasonably have some non-primary sources to back up the claims that are made. The sources provided either: are primary sources (3 of 5 sources, or do not mention Legacoop at all. The non primary sources mention "a group of teachers from Luiss" or "the coordinator of the Research Center on Information Systems at LUISS Guido Carli." Thus far, I have been unable to verify any claim in this article via the non-primary sources. Thoughts on this article? Should it be saved and improved or scrapped? My concern is that it may just be promotional on the part of Legacoop. Curdigirl (talk) 19:03, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Curdigirl (talk) 19:03, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:06, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Based on primary sources, with no evidence that anything much happened beyond the idea being launched. Mccapra (talk) 04:47, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG as written. However, I did find non-trivial coverage on this term as defined as an "ad hoc network in which all devices are required to communicate and carry each other's traffic, even when those devices are associated with different owners and different administrative domains." (see "Detecting Selfish Behavior in a Cooperative Commons", Hyun Jin Kim ; Peha, J.M, 2008 3rd IEEE Symposium on New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks, October 2008, pp.1-12) That's what a cooperative commons is, and this article is really about one specific example of a cooperative commons but not cooperative commons as a whole. The article could be rewritten as there are multiple peer reviewed journal articles on Cooperative Commons.4meter4 (talk) 18:44, 5 October 2019 (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.