Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PARSIFAL Project EU
Yes, the writing style justifies deletion all by itself.  Uninformative style is indeed a criterion for deletion, and in fact #G11|speedy deletion: ("Pages that are exclusively promotional, and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic.")  This is "content that, while apparently intended to mean something, is so confused that no reasonable person can be expected to make any sense of it," and as such is indeed |patent nonsense in our technical sense.  Let's face it, the PR style this is written in is vague, uneditable handwaving.  Its |optimistic predictions, while probably "appropriate" for a grant application, break our core |neutrality policy.  The text is too vague and too unspecific to be improved by editing.  About all most readers are going to take home from this article is that some people in the EU held some meetings about the security of financial institutions, and published some equally vague papers about the subject, with "ontologies" and other unhelpful jargon
— User:Ihcoyc, 15:10, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:CSD||WP:NONSENSE||WP:SPAM||WP:NPOV (Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion)