Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Information and communication technologies for development

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 delete. RL0919 (talk) 05:03, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Information and communication technologies for development[edit]

[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)

As discussed at WP:ANI, virtually incomprehensible article, seemingly mostly original research, about what appears to be a series of somewhat loosely-related topics rather than one topic in general. Home Lander (talk) 00:49, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:52, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete; saw the ANI discussion, very bad article for Wikipedia. Hardly something that can really been written about and a big TNT case anyway. J 947 ^{^{^(c)}}, at 03:18, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Essay (or essays), incomprehensible, dreadfully long. Perhaps an online class project per [1]. WP:TNT. Bishonen | talk 09:39, 29 November 2019 (UTC).[reply]
- Comment: Bishonen, confirmed as a class project per [2]. Home Lander (talk) 17:38, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Essayish, and as per nomination; but I just love this template: This article may be incomprehensible. Lectonar (talk) 14:16, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Clear case of WP:SYNTH -- while the article does have extensive sources, all are just sort of swirled together to create the impression that they are talking about the same subject. Michepman (talk) 16:34, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - WP:TNT. This may be a notable topic (the concept has a dedicated conference), but this mess of an article is in the way of someone writing something policy compliant. - MrOllie (talk) 17:43, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. series of poor essays joined together to make a meaningless article. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 17:59, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - It looks like they slipped up and admitted that this article is for a class project here. Honestly, I'm shocked that something this atrocious was able to linger around since 2005. I suspect that this project predated Wikimedia's guidelines on coordinating class projects. Michepman (talk) 19:11, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if I'd say they "slipped up". It's not clear to me they were trying to hide that it was a class project. It's easily possible they didn't think they had to do anything. Even if this came after the guidelines, a lot of projects happen blissfully unaware of them. And there remains IMO a gap in how to handle projects outside the US and Canada. Nil Einne (talk) 16:41, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, perhaps redirect to Information_and_communications_technology#Developing_countries until a proper article can be developed. ICT4D, with books and hundreds of papers devoted to the topic, is undoubtedly a notable topic and there is sufficient secondary sourcing with which to develop an article. Unfortunately, the current article is full of synthesis and is long enough that reworking it seems unworkable, short of starting over. I don't like recommending deletion based on WP:TNT, but this is a poster child for such an approach. No prejudice to re-creation as a proper article. --{{u|Mark viking}} {Talk} 19:41, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As the editor who discovered the page and started the ani on it, the history is comprised of 100s of students submitting what appear to be vaguely related essays into this article, slowly bloating it over the decades. It's now 400,000+ bites and the 56th largest article, and consists of unscalable walls of text. The topic, whatever it is, seems to be notable, but the article is too messy to even figure what it's even talking about. Although I'm not fond of it as an argument, TNT seems to be the only option here. I'll ad that a steward may be needed for the deletion. 💵Money💵emoji💵^{Talk💸Help out at CCI!} 20:10, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete perhaps we should have an article on the concept. But the current article is unsalvageable, not least because the history suggests there could very well be a lot of uncaught copyvios. Nil Einne (talk) 16:41, 3 December 2019 (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.