Deletion of CLEAR goal criteria

Comment: this corporate-training neologism that has evidently failed to catch on widely. The sources quoted at length above do nothing to change the lack of |verifiable evidence of |notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:NEOLOGISM)

Comment: and redirect both this article and the article on PURE goal criteria (see rticles for deletion/PURE goal criteria) into a new section of Goal setting titled, e.g., "Criteria" or {{section link|SMART criteria#Additional criteria}}. As {{u|The Gnome}} noted above, the available sources are not good enough to support separate articles about these goal-criteria mnemonics. Furthermore, treating all goal-criteria mnemonics in one section of Goal setting will allow for more  treatment of goal criteria
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Attribution (WP:A||WP:NPOV)

Comment: 1) - first of all many thanks {{ping|Sam Sailor}} for the additional hits. Still lots of false positives, but your search parameters are vastly better nonetheless. However, I have checked the listed links, and almost all of them provide only passing mentions or quotes of Whitmore's publication about CLEAR as an additional set of goals, but do not elaborate on the concept ''in significant detail''. Such numerous mentions are a good argument against , agreed. But without in-depth analysis of the term and its underlying concept these sources still fail to establish notability for a stand-alone article. The term exists and is used by some authors, but Wikipedia is not a dictionary (). For the sake of efficiency, I won't add a similar comment at the parallel Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PURE goal criteria just yet, but will wait until the discussion here is over
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NOTNEO||WP:NOTDICT)