Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Roadex 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 Draftify. Going through the WP:AfC process, while not strictly required, will provide some useful review. -- RoySmith (talk) 19:59, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Roadex Project

[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)

Fails WP:V, WP:N, WP:GNG and WP:NOT. The article is unsourced, there is no significant coverage and it is written like an advert. The editor whose username is Z0 09:29, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Z0: How can you say it fails WP:V? This is an EU road infrastructure project, its obviously verifiable. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 10:01, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I meant the claims in the article do not meet WP:V as there are no sources to verify them. E.g. these numbers - 71 technical reports, 4 DVDs and project movies, 37 technology demonstrations, A host of seminars and workshops need a source, otherwise they're WP:OR. The editor whose username is Z0 10:07, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. My point is that the content can be verified from the projects own website. As governmental EU project, it is a reliable source for verifiability. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 10:20, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So far I've found no such sources, it could be original research for all I know. The editor whose username is Z0 10:31, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Their website is linked in the article. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 10:40, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear ZO, thank you for letting me know that the page for the ROADEX Project is being considered for deletion. It probably is my fault – I am a novice in these matters. I wrote the original page in 2010 and it sat happily on Wikipedia until I tried to bring it up to date this month. That said, a lot has happened with ROADEX since 2010. The EU part-funded projects ended in 2012 and ROADEX is now being self-funded by the Partners as the ROADEX NETWORK. My aim was (1) to make a historic record of the ROADEX project up to 2012, and then (2) to create a new page called the ROADEX NETWORK for the works done 2012-2018. These pages were published this month and Wikipedia has already suggested that I merge the new ROADEX NETWORK page into the ROADEX project page as they essentially deal with the same collaboration. I am planning to do this, and to add citations to the combined page to make it a better document. I am also obtaining permission from the ROADEX Lead Partner to permit Wikipedia to use ROADEX data. I have written a very brief COI on my talk page. I hope that this helps. Ron Ronmun (talk) 10:23, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:48, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:48, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Move to draft. The article clearly needs some secondary sources added, I suggest sending it the draft area for work and republishing via AfC at a later time if and when it meets the various notability and writing standards. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 15:24, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a plan Frayae. I'll find out how to do this and also take the opportunity of merging The ROADEX Project with The ROADEX NETWORK into one page. Thanks for your suggestion. Ron Ronmun (talk) 18:17, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I should have clarified. Moving it to the draft area (draftification) is done once the discussion is closed, normally by the person who closes the discussion. The discussion will remain open for at least a week, during which time the page stays where it is. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 17:55, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that clarification Frayae. I tried to move the page but got a lot of red boxes. I'll add some more citations on the current page. Ron Ronmun (talk) 18:07, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:48, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Incubate in draft space. Article subject potentially meets WP:GNG with sources like Snow Engineering and Transportation Research Record . Article creator is committing to improving the sourcing and content. — Newslinger talk 04:41, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Newslinger. I will add these sources to the page in my next edit.Ronmun (talk) 10:55, 1 August 2018 (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.