Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PREDICT Open Source Intelligence Team

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 no consensus. —Tom Morris (talk) 10:22, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PREDICT Open Source Intelligence Team (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

It's just a research group within an Agricultural Experiment Station, so I don't see how it's possibly notable, but I was requested to let the community decide. DGG ( talk ) 23:54, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:32, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:33, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:38, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, there appears to be sufficient sourcing to support article. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 00:45, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete We are like seven people in an office and we search Google all day. There is no reason that our office merits a Wikpdeia article. This is utterly irrelevant to anything else, which is why it is an orphan article. It would be comparable to having an article dedicated to the work a group of graduate students are doing for a professor. The article was created by a *former* employee who broke his nondisclosure agreement, and had a self-importance problem. Ryandward (talk) 18:04, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • If nobody in your college knows who you are, how did this article get written? And how did the FDA give you an honor award? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 00:08, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • To be honest, I have been working there since inception and I have never heard of any award that we have won, other than being awarded the contract. A former employee, Mrnelson, broke a confidentiality agreement, and wrote this basically as a way to make himself seem important to put on his resume. That article got written, because the news department at NMSU looks at who in the University is receiving grants. You can't honestly think that this page is worthwhile, can you? What information is gained to anybody by having this here?
  • Here is an list of people who won awards at NMSU, so you can get a feel of how they report the news around here, and just throw the word *award* around. Do you think everything here also merits a Wikipedia article?
    • Professor of range science at NMSU receives prestigious award for local, international efforts
    • NMSU professor receives award for work done in counseling psychology
    • NMSU administrative assistant to receive first ‘A’ Mountain Service Award
    • Here are 7700+ more articles about awards.

• • Cited article is incorrect. There are many "Honor Award" awarded. Thus, "Their work has earned NMSU the FDA’s 2010 Honor Award." is dubious. Another PREDICT developer claims to have won it that year. Natural Selection, Inc. Personnel Commended With 2010 FDA Honor Award for Effort on PREDICT. In all likelihood, it seems that Natural Selection won the award, and someone at NMSU was confused. Please see this Google search..

• • PREDICT at FDA has very little to do with NMSU, it is a nationwide program. NMSU, however, has a grant to work on PREDICT. Ryandward (talk) 16:47, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another employee who works in this office, page is unneeded to sustain any links.128.123.240.113 (talk) 19:05, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Wifione ^Message 07:39, 15 March 2012 (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.