Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lighthouse project

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. PhantomSteve/talk¦contribs\ 18:41, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lighthouse project

Lighthouse project (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)

No evidence that this term (as opposed to the German original) is in common English use. Has been previously prodded and deprodded. Sole ref is to an ngram for the German term. PamD 07:38, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Management-related deletion discussions. PamD 07:38, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment in the UK it would probably be a ‘beacon project’ but then it would only be a dictionary definition anyway, so not seeing much reason to keep. Mccapra (talk) 13:20, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:13, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Easily passes WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. The term is used in hundreds of published sources, including academic research in English and other languages. My university library has 115 peer reviewed English-language journal articles using the term (several of them with the term in the article title), over 200 non-peer reviewed journal articles, 588 newspaper articles, 14 conference proceedings, four books, and four academic reviews. In other words, the term is widely used and lots of verifiable sources exist. I can copy paste a selection of sources if asked, but frankly there are so many it seems implossible that WP:BEFORE was followed.4meter4 (talk) 19:03, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. Here are several peer reviewed journal articles using the term in the title (only a small handful of the 115 peer reviewed articles):

1. Transforming “The National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM)” Into a Lighthouse-Project of Sustainability, Seifried, Dieter ; Zayas, Luis Fernandez ; Ramirez, Alex, Energy Procedia, 2014, Vol.57, pp.3081-3090
2. Creating an Environmentally Sustainable Food Factory: A Case Study of the Lighthouse Project at Nestlé, Miah, J.H ; Griffiths, A ; Mcneill, R ; Poonaji, I ; Martin, R ; Morse, S ; Yang, A ; Sadhukhan, J, Procedia CIRP, 2015, Vol.26, pp.229-234
3. "The Lighthouse Project", Le Rose, Barbara ; King, Linda ; Greenwood, Salldy, Gifted Child Quarterly, September 1979, Vol.23(3), pp.472-486

Here is an example of a conference proceeding:

1. "Selected findings from a German lighthouse project on electric mobility: A summary of outcomes in the field of vehicle to grid communication, ICT- and business model solutions", Dornberg, J. H ; Lutz, T, 2011 11th International Conference on ITS Telecommunications, August 2011, pp.486-491

Here is an example of newspaper/magazine articles (there are more than 500 of these kind of articles; the term is often used in political bills):

1. "BB&T Lighthouse Project pitches in at Vinson-Bynum", Wilson, Drew, TCA Regional News, Apr 29, 2018
2. "Dept of Defence - CSI-SC BUILDING 180 secures contract for DVA Lighthouse Project services, Pivotal Sources, Jun 8, 2017
3. "Alternative ; Medicine.(Lighthouse Project, Alternatives, helps those with serious drug problems)", Wellard, Sarah, Community Care, May 26, 2005, p.44

These are just a tiny selection of sources.4meter4 (talk) 19:30, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - it's a stub with no reliable sources, so nothing really to keep. No prejudice against recreation with sources that show notability if they exist. BTW the above sources, though I don't have access to them all, don't appear to show notability. We would need evidence of some kind of in depth coverage of the concept, not just use of the term per WP:NOTDICTIONARY. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 05:03, 2 October 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.