Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neutrino Array Radio Calibration

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. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrino Array Radio Calibration

Upon google search, doesn't seem notable. gordonrox24 (talk) 17:04, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be inclined to redirect to IceCube Neutrino Observatory rather than delete, as that is what it appears to be an element of (see: [1] here). Pontificalibus (talk) 17:12, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would support that.--gordonrox24 (talk) 17:22, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added additional text to clarify that this project is the new experiment replacing the older RICE project. This is the first article I've done, so I appreciate all assistance and advice. Thanks! --Smilemagician (talk) 18:46, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What the article needs is references to validate the statements that are made, not more statements. The delete votes are coming because people can't find anything to back up the statements in the article. Looie496 (talk) 19:53, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~Speedy delete~~ as a copyright violation of http://www.physics.ku.edu/facilities/rice/rice.html. (The db-copyvio tag has already been placed.) WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:51, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To meet both the letter and the spirit of U.S. copyright laws, we have to delete or hide copyright violations at about the same time that we find them ... but I don't have any preference how we hide them. I saw complete sentences that looked like copyvio all over that article, so I deleted, but I'll restore the article and delete most of the contents per request on my talk page; you all are welcome to continue to debate here what the final result should be. - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 21:35, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As the edits have now addressed the copyvio issues, I am changing my opinion from Delete to Keep. This appears to be the successor of a major effort to detect neutrinos and seems notable in itself. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:30, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as edits now show it as a sucessor to the Radio Ice Cerenkov Experiment, which is an assertionof notability but it does need references for this, so I added a refimprove tag in the hope they will be added in due course. Pontificalibus (talk) 21:52, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Copyright issues have been addressed. Issues of notability are subjective.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 15:27, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep no copyrights problems, definitely notable.Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 03:55, 19 April 2009 (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.