Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RuralE.Evolution European 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. Mkativerata (talk) 20:18, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RuralE.Evolution European Project

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

Technical nomination. This article was PRODed by Crusio. The reason for PROD was: "Ephemeral project. No independent sources. Does not meet WP:GNG." I think that the deletion needs more broader discussion. Beagel (talk) 10:52, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete One of many European projects that exist for a few years and then disappear again. No evidence whatsoever that this meets WP:GNG. --Crusio (talk) 11:04, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Delete. Yet another EU research project. What all of these spam articles share is an impenetrable, rosy but vague style that always teeters on the brink of patent nonsense. This one took a step in the wrong direction: RuralE-Evolution ’s goal would be that the designed methodology could be transferred and used as a guideline for other European agro-energy districts, which were interested in setting up collaboration projects among public and private sector.
These objectives should be reached by :
A data collection and analysis on existing PPPs models and schemes in the participating countries and globally, and a framework for the application of the PPP scheme to agro-energy districts.
The application of the provisional methodology to target areas and a drawing of 5 feasibility studies for pilot PPPs on agro-energy districts.
A validation and dissemination of the final methodology. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:41, 30 June 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.