Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Trappist the monk (talk | contribs) at 23:09, 17 February 2016 (→[[Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration]]: replace et al. in author/editor parameters with |display-authors=etal or |display-editors=etal; using AWB). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.Revision as of 23:09, 17 February 2016 by Trappist the monk (talk | contribs) (→[[Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration]]: replace et al. in author/editor parameters with |display-authors=etal or |display-editors=etal; using AWB)
- 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The result was nomination withdrawn by original nominator. Non-admin close. JDDJS (talk) 16:56, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Does not appear to be notable to me. JDDJS (talk) 16:50, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- It is now clear to me that this article is in fact notable, so I withdraw my nomination. JDDJS (talk) 16:56, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Discussed by the Federation of American Scientists here, by the US Government Accountability Office here (though that may be considered a primary source), the RAND Corporation talks about it in one of their publications here. There's not a lot but I think there's enough to scratch passed WP:GNG. Also, I imagine as an offical government "office" or whatever that it should be considered inherently notable (I don't know if policy addresses this). SÆdontalk 21:51, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:41, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:42, 27 April 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) 00:01, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep needs some examples of programs adding to it. I'll do that. Greglocock (talk) 00:35, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - This topic appears to pass WP:GNG, per:
- "Innovative Development: Global Hawk and DarkStar: Their Advanced Concept Technology Demonstrator Program Experience, Executive Summary". RAND. Retrieved 2012-05-02.
- Benney, Richard; et al. "The Joint Precision Airdrop System Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration" (PDF). American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. Retrieved May 01, 2012.
{{cite web}}: Check date values in:|accessdate=(help); External link in|publisher= - "Advanced Concept Technology Demostrations (ACTD) Website". Defense Acquisitions University.
- Haas, David J.; et al. (2000). "Joint Advanced Health and Usage Monitoring System (JAHUMS) Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration (ACTD)". American Helicopter Society International. Retrieved May 02, 2012.
{{cite web}}: Check date values in:|accessdate=(help); External link in|publisher=
- Keep- Enough valid sourcing for it to be an article--MOLEY (talk) 11:26, 2 May 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.