Deletion of Apprendre2.0

Comment: Fails |GNG, in spite of this deluge of sources, since they are neither "independent of the subject", nor "address the subject directly in detail". Many of the sources provided are actually dealing with Social learning (social pedagogy), not with Apprendre2.0. As a consequence, several sections - such as "Problematic aspect", or "Methods of work" - are actually Original Research
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: I cleaned the article from many references not linked to the main topic. All the ones I removed were here to explain terms in the article, and don’t prove what the article says itself, resulting in o original research|original research
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: I didn’t want to interfere here as it is not my main language, but as this is a french association and I carefully looked at the citations, I can say most of this article is either o original research|original researches or referenced with the website of the association itself. Many references are irrelevant, they don’t prove what is said in the article but are here from the author words to "explain the past research context" (more clearly, these are citations about the terms used in the article, and not at all about the main topic, most of them are even older than the association
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)