Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Landmap

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. Wifione ^Message 07:56, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Landmap

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

A web service. No attempt made to demonstrate its notability. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:47, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Landmap buys datasets from leading data providers and supplies them free-of-charge to the UK academic community via Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) standards for maximum interoperability. Also it empowers users through the Learning Zone to access and apply Landmap data in an efficient and effective way so powering high quality research, teaching and learning. This is not just a web service, but a full fledged service based at Mimas, University of Manchester, United Kingdom Dulcet bg (talk) 13:41, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:43, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete. Going just from the name of the business, they sell map data. If this is in fact what they do, this description qualifies for speedy deletion as patent nonsense as well as being nothing but puffery: high quality spatial data download service which is enhanced and supported by a range of learning materials. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:32, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There is no selling of anything. All the spatial data and the learning resources are provided free to the UK academic community. Quite annoyed to be considered for deletion when it is a non-profit making service, purely for academic purpose. Dulcet bg (talk) 19:58, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. As Dulcet bg has already said, this is primarily a service funded by a consortium of a large number of British universities for use by British academics though, like a number of similar services, it is probably also available not only to the British government but also commercially to third parties (it won't be allowed to make a profit but any money it gets would reduce the subscriptions from participating universities). At the very least, the article should be selectively merged to Mimas (data centre), which hosts Landmap. However, a quick glance at GScholar shows a large number of hits relating to both its development and use - while some (particularly from non-British sites) are simply coincidental and a number of others will probably be mentions in passing, I suspect that quite a decent article (if rather differently focussed than the present one) could be written by from what is left once these have been sifted out. PWilkinson (talk) 19:18, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So can the message be removed that the page is ready for deletion? Dulcet bg (talk) 08:56, 6 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) 00:47, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Searching Google Scholar gives lots of hits. This is a major academic initiative. Did RHaworth make any effort to establish notability before posting this? Clearly he/she didn't ask on the article talk page. Kindly don't AfD things without proper investigation. --Colapeninsula (talk) 15:37, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The writing is pure incomprehensible crap (loaded with unexplained insider jargon) that shows no empathy for the reader. But the topic looks probably wp:notable and encyclopedic. North8000

Update.....the discussed wording has been removed. North8000 (talk) 00:06, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep I've stripped this article down to a (referenced) stub, taking out a section that was copied straight from the project's website and another which was linking to a "Who do you want do snog?" site. But as people have said, there is a basis for something better to be rebuilt. AllyD (talk) 22:09, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The data is primarily for students and researchers and can be accessed only through Shibboleth or Athens or similar UK university/institution authentication. So there is no scope of data being available commercially or to any government organisation. Can you please explain the reason of calling the writing "crap"? This is not understandable and sounds rude for a national data center academic level free service. Also the best information has been written about the service on the website, so copying it seems quite reasonable. We will work on getting more information adhering to wikipedia standards. Thanks. Dulcet bg (talk) 23:28, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the crap writing has been removed. But I called it crap due to being loaded with and relying upon unexplained internal organization-specific jargon. In the context of an enclyclopedia article, to me such represents incomprehensible writing, poor communication, and arrogance rather than empathy towards the reader. The "arrogance" part leads me to use a nasty characterization, something I never say when people simply try to do their best. But that stuff is gone and my recommendation was and is "keep" Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 00:12, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation, though usage of such words sounds inappropriate. Dulcet bg (talk) 19:54, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies for the rough language, particularly now that I see it came about as a result of two innocent things rather than deliberately written that way as a wikipedia article. ......creation of the material elsewhere, suitable for that venue, and then just bringing it over to this article. Doubly so with you being new. Sorry. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 20:07, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can the message be removed which asks the article to be deleted? Dulcet bg (talk) 19:54, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It will run it's course (probably a couple more days.) (It appears near-certain that the result will be "keep"). And then all of that will get taken care of. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 20:11, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind response. Much appreciated. Looking forward to the removal of deletion message. Regards Dulcet bg (talk) 09:38, 14 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.