This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Education. It is one of many
deletion lists coordinated by
WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at
WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at
WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Education|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
Note that there are a few
scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by
a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove links to other discussions (
prod,
CfD,
TfD etc.) related to Education.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's
deletion policy and
WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.
Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
It is one of many small associations in Germany that rent out living space to students. Neither the association nor its dormitory has any special significance that would justify an article; I couldn't find any independent sources that is not advertisement. Was deleted twice in German Wikipedia because of nonexistent notability.
Killarnee (
talk) 00:27, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
School with no claim to notability and thus not meeting
WP:ORG.
Was
de-ProD'd by
Necrothesp stating "secondary schools in the UK are usually kept" however
SCHOOLOUTCOMES does state that "Secondary schools are not presumed to be notable simply because they exist".
There is routine coverage online, of terms dates and school fêtes as you'd expect, only news-type coverage is that some of it's students have been victims of crime (while not actually in the school)
[1][2] which isn't anything unusual - There's also a little about the bus that was going to get cut and then wasn't,
[3][4] which I would only say counts towards notability if the article were about the bus, which it isn't. --
D'n'B-t -- 19:53, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, per above and WP isn't a directory of schools.
Traumnovelle (
talk) 20:18, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment There is a full page case study in:
Val, Brooks (1 January 2002). Assessment In Secondary Schools: The New Teacher's Guide to Monitoring, Assessment, Recording, Reporting, and Accountability. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
ISBN978-0-335-20637-7.
This also cites a paper by the Head of Science. That book has 134 citations. It seems to be mentioned in a number of other books too with an educational research focus. Research conducted at the school does not make the school notable by itself, but it is not insignificant.
Sirfurboy🏄 (
talk) 20:26, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirect to
Balsall Common where the school's mentioned, if notability cannot be established. It was opened in 1957. As might be expected, there's local news coverage on matters such as a school uniform dispute, theatricals, drugs, sporting achievements, exam results, headteacher appointment/retirement etc but haven't come across anything that makes this school notable outside of the area it serves.
Rupples (
talk) 01:14, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
the topic of the article appears to be mostly unnotable and the entire article is unsourced, with the only outgoing links leading to a personal website, and the publishers website.
Gaismagorm (
talk) 19:12, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. No reviews in
WP:LIBRARY. Gets a mention in
[5], but nothing to substantiate that it was "influential".
Jfire (
talk) 03:13, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep You have at least three things going on here: 1) Historic antisemitism at ivy league schools, which have plenty of RS'es 2) current protest events being alternatively branded as anti-Zionist or antisemitic, also covered in a lot of RS'es but as current events rather than historical reflection, and 3) commentaries connecting the two. I don't see how we can avoid covering this, even if the ultimate focus needs to be bigger than Columbia and the ultimate title needs to be different. An AfD may be a good place to start such a discussion, but I doubt it will end up resolved well here.
Jclemens (
talk) 17:00, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Appears to be a private school, needing a higher level of sourcing than typically asked for in chartered colleges & universities. Relatively new, so no historical notability and no N:ORG level sourcing found.
StarMississippi 03:03, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. Quick overlook, one source on the page and is not independent or secondary. Per nom, page does not satisfy the notability guidelines for organizations. Fails
WP:NSCHOOL.
RangersRus (
talk) 14:03, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Most substantial source cited is a student newspaper article from time of construction. Further searches suggest that neither original construction or recent developments appear to have generated significant independent coverage. All coverage is from university or contractor press releases, or passing mentions as location of various departments. No indication building meets
WP:GNG or
WP:NBUILD.
Triptothecottage (
talk) 23:17, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Subject is not independently notable (and notability is not inherited from its unquestionably notable parent organization).
ElKevbo (
talk) 21:54, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I like the redirect ATD proposed by
Reywas92. I guess there's some benefit in having it the result of a AfD (now that we're already here) in that it's harder to revert.
Russ Woodroofe (
talk) 10:20, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Subject is not independently notable (and notability is not inherited from its unquestionably notable parent organization).
ElKevbo (
talk) 21:57, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete I'm glad to hear your acknowledgment of GVS as a dubious source. I fully agree that this promotional page should be removed, as it clearly fails to meet WP:N. --—
Saqib (
talk |
contribs) 17:37, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I did not acknowledge no such thing (I said mostly dubious), even if GVS is a valid source, it still does not meet notability criteria.
Sheriff |
☎ 911 | 17:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Fails
WP:NCORP. No significant coverage in reliable sources could be found either under the name "Institute of IT Training" or its apparent new name "Learning & Performance Institute". I know it's not relevant to notability, but the article reads like an advertisement and is borderline
WP:G11 despite having 63 revisions over 14 years.
Mz7 (
talk) 07:41, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
(Renomination: the discussion from 2010 closed as "no consensus.") I don't believe that Brenda Jean Patrick fulfills the notability requirements for inclusion in Wikipedia. She is (was? I think I found an obituary) an educational consultant who touted the idea of "customer care" in school districts. Most of the information I can find about her consultant work is in the form of press releases in local papers when she held workshops for a district. I don't see independent coverage outside of her PR.
Joyous!Noise! 17:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
No indication school passes
WP:NSCHOOL and written entirely as a
WP:PROMO for the school. Was previously redirected to
Elwood Union Free School District but reverted more than once. Unless notability can be established, seeking consensus for restoration of the redirect. Bungle(
talk •
contribs) 17:42, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirect to
Elwood Union Free School District. The entire article is written in a promotional style, with information that could apply to most middle schools. I can't find anything to suggest that it is notable in its own right.
Joyous!Noise! 19:28, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirect to
Elwood Union Free School District. An unsourced, promotional piece of fluff, that reads as if it were copied from the school board's page. I don't see a claim to notability.
Meters (
talk) 07:29, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirect and protect page. This isn't a notable subject and it's clear that these restorations are a connected editor not aware of
WP:NOTFACEBOOK.
4.37.252.50 (
talk) 18:11, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete - generally an article on a vocational support facility like this would be made a redirect to the school district or RESA that manages it as an ATD, but the extremely generic title seems to fail our rules for article titles.
4.37.252.50 (
talk) 14:23, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete looks like an advert and fails
WP:ORG. Would reconsider if there are Urdu sources but there is no Urdu version of this article.
LibStar (
talk) 03:56, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Fails
WP:NSCHOOL, and
WP:GNG. Only thing I could find in a search was a press release. Heck, it's not even the most notable LCIS school out there.
Allan Nonymous (
talk) 21:11, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
If sources aren't found, one could redirect either to
Aubonne (locality) or to
Nord Anglia Education (operator) though I think locality may be better. I'd have to check if Swiss newspapers covered this subject...
WhisperToMe (
talk) 04:07, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 22:18, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
My involvement in this nomination is entirely procedural; I have no opinion or further comment at this time. WCQuidditch☎✎ 19:45, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
OMG, thanks I must have not been paying attention when checking if there was any prior discussion on the talk page.
Moritoriko (
talk) 23:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 22:21, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. Fails
WP:ORGIN and
WP:GNG. The article has only one source and the subject doesn't seem to have significant coverage to prove its notability either.
ZyphorianNexus (
talk) 23:47, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Article was AfDed in 2014 and closed as no consensus per a part
WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES which subsequently was repealed in 2017. Since the previous nom, no new sources have come to light. Probably best if we redirect to
Nord Anglia Education.
Allan Nonymous (
talk) 04:42, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 04:28, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Article created by a clear
WP:COI editor and fails
WP:GNG, and
WP:NSCHOOL. Redirect to British Schools foundation may be on the cards, but that article has notability concerns as well.
Allan Nonymous (
talk) 14:50, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment: The nomination is incorrect in that the school has a reference. When the article was crerated I believe this scraped through as a "Highschool" because it was judged at the time that such a school was inherently notable. Today I have my doubts. A diligent
WP:BEFORE finds that some sources have potential, but do not meet
WP:NSCHOOL. I choose to remain neutral in this discussion. 🇺🇦
FiddleTimtrentFaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 08:24, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
No indication of notability outside of the college. I am unable to find significant discussion of this mascot in independent sources. ...discospinstertalk 03:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Subject is not independently notable - notability is not inherited from its unquestionably notable parent organization
ElKevbo (
talk) 11:21, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Subject is not independently notable - notability is not inherited from its unquestionably notable parent organization.
ElKevbo (
talk) 11:24, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Subject is not independently notable - notability is not inherited from its unquestionably notable parent organization
ElKevbo (
talk) 11:26, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Subject is not independently notable - notability is not inherited from its unquestionably notable parent organization.
ElKevbo (
talk) 11:29, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Run-of-the-mill school with no significant coverage in reliable sources, thus failing to meet
WP:NORG. Additionally, I am nominating the following pages created by the same user which share the same notability issues:
Comment - The bundled nomination is going to take a little longer to be sure on. Sonatikuri has a web presence but almost a suspicious lack in other sources. I expect lack of newspaper coverage is down to this being from India, although JSTOR has a single advert for the school in amongst other articles. I wondered if there were alternate names, but the web search suggested this is right. The school has a small staff and I could not find enrolment numbers, but is clearly not large. That one is not looking very notable. Much the same can be said of Sarajubala Vidyapith. Amtala High School, however, has multiple hits in books
[9], and this may be through a notable alumnus/alumna. Ultimately none of them may show notability (I see problems with most) but some reading to do there. It also gets a mention in this paper
[10] which says There are some renowned educational institutions in Murshidabad district which include Amtala High School. If Amtala were unbundled from this, I would say delete the other two. This might be a good idea, as we want to avoid a
WP:TRAINWRECK, which could occur if Amtala really is renowned.
Sirfurboy🏄 (
talk) 11:38, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
PROD countered. Per
WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES, articles about primary schools are only kept if they can be shown to meet
WP:NORG. That is not the case here. Indeed, this is an article about a kindergarten. Utopes(talk / cont) 01:59, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Weak keep It is also a story about a UK-based charity. I added a few references. Hopefully just enough to save this story.
Ruud Buitelaar (
talk) 04:05, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep per Ruud Buitelaar.
Tamsier (
talk) 03:06, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete - although happy to consider a suitable redirect. I'm sorry but there is just not enough information about this school, as is the case of the vast majority of junior schools. Yes, this one is a charitable venture. Lots of them are. There are now four sources on the page. I analyse these below (with the first SHOFCO source being the only one that was there prior to AfD). On my analysis we do not have anything that meets
WP:SIRS. There is almost nothing we can actually say about this school in an article. Source analysis:
Created with templates {{
ORGCRIT assess table}} and {{
ORGCRIT assess}} This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor.
SHOFCO is Shining Hope for Communities, US based, I think it is a charity, and with a focus on Kibera.
SHOFCO appears legitimate. I have not investigated too hard on that score because this source fails on SIGCOV
The link is dead, but it is dated April 2009, and archive.org has a copy of the article
[12]. There is no mention of this school at all in the article.
As there is no mention of the school, this is moot.
Fitzwilliam College Newsletter with news of an alumna, the school's founder.
There is a single paragraph telling us that Sarah Shucksmith, a former Geography student, founded this school in her gap year, and they are building a new school building. It's creditable, but it's not notable.
– It is reporting and this is primary per
WP:PRIMARYNEWS. However, as I know people will want to claim otherwise, and SIGCOV is not met anyway, I'll leave that as undetermined. It does not change anything.
This is a
WP:SPS - a blog is a self published source
– I have no reason to say the writer is unreliable, but this is still self published.
To be honest, this would be well short of CORPDEPTH, but I would give ground to this being a charitable work, not a corporation. There is a little information here from which a page could be written, but it really isn't much. A lot more is needed, but I'll give it a yes on this one.
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. Speedy is off the table given the time passed since nomination.
There is nothing extant to redirect this to, however if a target is created, this can be redirected at editorial discretion.
StarMississippi 02:50, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
A defamatory article based on
WP:OR with a non-free image improperly labeled as such and a subject that fails
WP:GNG.
Lettlre (
talk) 19:07, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Speedy Delete/Convert - I feel like the shooter himself doesn't meet notability guidelines, but the event does, I feel like the article should be converted into something similar to
2014 Isla Vista killings, where the event itself is published, but not focused on the perp.
Gonzafer001 (
talk) 21:21, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
That's plausible
RedSlash 16:10, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I concur, we should move the page to focus less on the perp, and more on the actual story.
Gonzafer001 (
talk) 03:21, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Speedy delete -
WP:NOTNEWS,
WP:BLP. Suspected murderer on the run, not yet captured by authorities. Also, the image of the suspect is not licensed for our use.
— Maile (
talk) 19:25, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Not a speedy. The copyrighted image can be removed. This article is not "entirely negative in tone and unsourced." (emphasis mine). It may be entirely inappropriate for Wikipedia, but
CNN has covered it, so it's unreasonable to argue it's A7.
Jclemens (
talk) 22:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I've removed the speedy tag and added a link to the CNN coverage. That doesn't mean I think this should be kept: it means I don't think any of our speedy deletion criteria apply.
Jclemens (
talk) 03:59, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Speedy keep - this neither is
WP:OR (did you... read the references??), nor does it fail the
WP:GNG based on the substantial news coverage.
RedSlash 01:41, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The main source is a self-described zine that basically makes a bunch of allegations on a non-convicted individual. That's what I mean by OR.
Lettlre (
talk) 17:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
This is not the only source--it's been covered by national news and extensively covered by local news. Even so, that "zine" article is extensively sourced with interviews from people directly involved, like Elias's former boss at the police department.
RedSlash 17:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete To the above user, this article and its tone is wholly inappropriate for Wikipedia (
WP:BLPBALANCE) and inappropriately POV, incredibly violating
WP:PERP; as the subject has been caught there's no use for the article as-is currently. The picture has been removed due to a poor licensing rationale and as the image involves children in no way involved with the subject or the story, and a BLPBALANCE-violating title in itself. Nate•(
chatter) 02:18, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Speedy delete as a
WP:BLP violation. The article is almost completely unsourced contentious claims about a living person.
Jfire (
talk) 02:53, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
It is completely sourced.
RedSlash 16:10, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment This is all over the news in the Northwest. He was tracked down and committed suicide. It's being presented on the news as factual including interviews with people he worked with. He isn't a living person but a recently deceased person so I realize BLP still applies. The name of the minor victim has not been included here or mentioned in the news but they spoke with her family. LizRead!Talk! 03:07, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Rename to
2024 Yakima murder and child abduction case, or something similar. They issued an Amber Alert about this case in the middle of the night, and it has certainly been heavily covered, but I agree that naming the article after Huizar doesn't entirely make sense since nothing about him is notable except for his crimes. See
WP:BLP1E (although he is dead it is still relevant).
LonelyBoy2012 (
talk) 07:02, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The fact that you named the wrong city speaks to the fact that he actually was notable for multiple crimes across Eastern Washington. His rape of a 13-year-old at his middle school took place in Yakima; his double murder happened in West Richland, an hour southeast.
Because of this, it feels awkward to me to name an article about several different, interconnected crimes, afte just one of them... the one thing they all have in common is Elias.
RedSlash 16:59, 30 April 2024 (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.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 06:25, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirect to
Webster University#Campus. If it doesn't exist there, merge the
citation so the source of the full list is still available to readers. ~
Kvng (
talk) 15:22, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose a redirect, it's not a plausible search term.
AusLondonder (
talk) 15:50, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
This was nominated a year ago and the result was no consensus, because an organization that is the main feeder competition for the IOI has to have sources. I agree, but really, there is nothing, I've tried. I propose redirection to
International Olympiad in Informatics.
Snowmanonahoe (
talk·contribs·typos) 15:14, 19 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
ToadetteEdit! 16:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep and improve - This is an exchange program through the US State Department. Granted, the article needs work, and needs better sourcing. But this is a very impressive program. It would be a shame to write this off.
— Maile (
talk) 15:43, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I've added some valuable links to YouTube info created by the Fellowship program.
— Maile (
talk) 21:57, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm currently working on whe wording and sourcing.
— Maile (
talk) 23:38, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Note - Do Not Delete - Work in Progress: This was inadvertently and prematurely deleted yesterday for copyright errors. I am currently reworking this article in my personal user space, to avoid misunderstandings over sourcing, etc. This is an important article that needs work. Please have patience, and I'll get the article in better shape.
— Maile (
talk) 12:35, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I am surprised to see you say that I "inadvertently and prematurely deleted" copyright content from Wikipedia. There's no such thing as "prematurely" removing copyright content from Wikipedia. We can't host copyright content on Wikipedia, not even temporarily for editing. And we can't include it in sandboxes or drafts either. —
Diannaa (
talk) 13:44, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep Though the article could benefit from a through revision, the subject itself is notable enough.
TH1980 (
talk) 03:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)reply
For what it's worth, I just did an edit update of this article. The lead is now more informative about how this program originated, complete with sources. And I've done a sample list of US and foreign universities which act as hosts.
— Maile (
talk) 23:37, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 16:38, 22 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. I just went through and reviewed the edits made by Maile. Not a single source supports notability under WP:GNG or WP:ORGCRIT. All sources are primary sources (e.g. the authorizing legislation), or they are not independent (State Department webpages or the webpages of Humphrey Fellowship sponsoring institutions), or the coverage is trivial (single references to someone in the article being a Humphrey Fellow). The MPR News source fails verification. My BEFORE search turns up nothing else useful for establishing notability. (One potential source is
here, but it is published by a Humphrey Fellowship sponsor institution and I don't have access to the actual text to validate whether it is independent.) Failing the unearthing of significant coverage in multiple, independent, secondary sources, this doesn't clear the bar.
Dclemens1971 (
talk) 23:11, 29 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 06:07, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I know it is unusual to delete a University - but I cannot find any online information about the University (except the bare fact that it is on Yemeni University lists - although I am not sure how old these lists are). It appears no longer to have a website. Links are either not orking or provide no helpful info. No obvious lkinks to anything else. The wiki page suggests the unbioversity is strong in nutrition - but
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9517972/ suggests it is not on the 2022 list of Yemeni universities awarding decrees in nutrition. Perhaps it has changed its name or amalgamated?
Newhaven lad (
talk) 09:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment The article is entirely unsourced (general external links are used as reference) and filled with original research. Before reaching a conclusion whether to delete or keep I think it'd be fair if someone draftified it and use sources then we could've judged it based on it's merit. But if it stands as is, then delete seems impending.
X (
talk) 19:27, 19 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 07:41, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 05:51, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 18:58, 18 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Shadow311 (
talk) 19:07, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep: For a lost 1940s TV show, we at least have a claim to significance, record on where it aired and some of what it contained, and a review. StreetcarEnjoyer(talk) 00:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Despite being a large article, it appears to have been mostly edited by COI editors and contains
original research that isn't backed up by sources. The far majority of references are simply from the university's website, and as such notability isn't proven due to the lack of outside sourcing. ~
Eejit43 (
talk) 01:40, 9 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirect - and selectively merge any content with reliable independent sources to
University of Colorado School of Medicine. As the nominating editor stated, article seems promo and lacks secondary sources.
4.37.252.50 (
talk) 01:25, 13 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello Eejit43, thank you for the valuable feedback! I am presently retrieving outside sources to backup the information presented in this article. I am aware of the problem of promotion of interests on WP and how many hide their identity. My hope is that being transparent will help, along with the pending external citations that will demonstrate impact and notability both locally and nationally.
Mikepascoe (
talk) 13:28, 13 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello all,
An initial draft of the article had 31 cuanschutz.edu (internal) sources + 23 external (independent) sources = 54 total.
The present version now has 19 internal + 42 external source = 61 total.
The percentage of sources from the university website (Eejit43's original comment) has decreased from 57% to 31%.
Further improvements can be made, thank you for your continued review
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 03:10, 16 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment I'm not really seeing any SIGCOV from secondary sources. A selective merge might still be the best way forward.-
KH-1 (
talk) 04:25, 16 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello, could you please explain what a selective merge is and how this is a good way forward?
I'm also not sure how to satisfy the SIGCOV (significant coverage?) requirement. There are several external sources discussing the Program now from refutable sources. Do you have an example of a source that meets SIGCOV from other Wikipedia articles?
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting as there is no consensus. It would also help if an editor(s) would address
User:Mikepascoe's valid questions here. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 01:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Final relist. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 06:14, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I waited patiently before starting this AFD. Firstly, the article doesn't meet
WP:ORGCRIT; No verifiable significant, independent, third-party reliable sources. I was thinking maybe the creator was on
WP:ENN because other schools exist. While that aside, there is no importance for entry made by the school in question. Even if, I can't find source for it. Safari ScribeEdits!Talk! 01:27, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
School with no claim to notability and thus not meeting
WP:ORG.
Was
de-ProD'd by
Necrothesp stating "secondary schools in the UK are usually kept" however
SCHOOLOUTCOMES does state that "Secondary schools are not presumed to be notable simply because they exist".
There is routine coverage online, of terms dates and school fêtes as you'd expect, only news-type coverage is that some of it's students have been victims of crime (while not actually in the school)
[16][17] which isn't anything unusual - There's also a little about the bus that was going to get cut and then wasn't,
[18][19] which I would only say counts towards notability if the article were about the bus, which it isn't. --
D'n'B-t -- 19:53, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, per above and WP isn't a directory of schools.
Traumnovelle (
talk) 20:18, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment There is a full page case study in:
Val, Brooks (1 January 2002). Assessment In Secondary Schools: The New Teacher's Guide to Monitoring, Assessment, Recording, Reporting, and Accountability. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
ISBN978-0-335-20637-7.
This also cites a paper by the Head of Science. That book has 134 citations. It seems to be mentioned in a number of other books too with an educational research focus. Research conducted at the school does not make the school notable by itself, but it is not insignificant.
Sirfurboy🏄 (
talk) 20:26, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirect to
Balsall Common where the school's mentioned, if notability cannot be established. It was opened in 1957. As might be expected, there's local news coverage on matters such as a school uniform dispute, theatricals, drugs, sporting achievements, exam results, headteacher appointment/retirement etc but haven't come across anything that makes this school notable outside of the area it serves.
Rupples (
talk) 01:14, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep You have at least three things going on here: 1) Historic antisemitism at ivy league schools, which have plenty of RS'es 2) current protest events being alternatively branded as anti-Zionist or antisemitic, also covered in a lot of RS'es but as current events rather than historical reflection, and 3) commentaries connecting the two. I don't see how we can avoid covering this, even if the ultimate focus needs to be bigger than Columbia and the ultimate title needs to be different. An AfD may be a good place to start such a discussion, but I doubt it will end up resolved well here.
Jclemens (
talk) 17:00, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Appears to be a private school, needing a higher level of sourcing than typically asked for in chartered colleges & universities. Relatively new, so no historical notability and no N:ORG level sourcing found.
StarMississippi 03:03, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. Quick overlook, one source on the page and is not independent or secondary. Per nom, page does not satisfy the notability guidelines for organizations. Fails
WP:NSCHOOL.
RangersRus (
talk) 14:03, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete I'm glad to hear your acknowledgment of GVS as a dubious source. I fully agree that this promotional page should be removed, as it clearly fails to meet WP:N. --—
Saqib (
talk |
contribs) 17:37, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I did not acknowledge no such thing (I said mostly dubious), even if GVS is a valid source, it still does not meet notability criteria.
Sheriff |
☎ 911 | 17:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
No indication school passes
WP:NSCHOOL and written entirely as a
WP:PROMO for the school. Was previously redirected to
Elwood Union Free School District but reverted more than once. Unless notability can be established, seeking consensus for restoration of the redirect. Bungle(
talk •
contribs) 17:42, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirect to
Elwood Union Free School District. The entire article is written in a promotional style, with information that could apply to most middle schools. I can't find anything to suggest that it is notable in its own right.
Joyous!Noise! 19:28, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirect to
Elwood Union Free School District. An unsourced, promotional piece of fluff, that reads as if it were copied from the school board's page. I don't see a claim to notability.
Meters (
talk) 07:29, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirect and protect page. This isn't a notable subject and it's clear that these restorations are a connected editor not aware of
WP:NOTFACEBOOK.
4.37.252.50 (
talk) 18:11, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete - generally an article on a vocational support facility like this would be made a redirect to the school district or RESA that manages it as an ATD, but the extremely generic title seems to fail our rules for article titles.
4.37.252.50 (
talk) 14:23, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment: The nomination is incorrect in that the school has a reference. When the article was crerated I believe this scraped through as a "Highschool" because it was judged at the time that such a school was inherently notable. Today I have my doubts. A diligent
WP:BEFORE finds that some sources have potential, but do not meet
WP:NSCHOOL. I choose to remain neutral in this discussion. 🇺🇦
FiddleTimtrentFaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 08:24, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Run-of-the-mill school with no significant coverage in reliable sources, thus failing to meet
WP:NORG. Additionally, I am nominating the following pages created by the same user which share the same notability issues:
Comment - The bundled nomination is going to take a little longer to be sure on. Sonatikuri has a web presence but almost a suspicious lack in other sources. I expect lack of newspaper coverage is down to this being from India, although JSTOR has a single advert for the school in amongst other articles. I wondered if there were alternate names, but the web search suggested this is right. The school has a small staff and I could not find enrolment numbers, but is clearly not large. That one is not looking very notable. Much the same can be said of Sarajubala Vidyapith. Amtala High School, however, has multiple hits in books
[20], and this may be through a notable alumnus/alumna. Ultimately none of them may show notability (I see problems with most) but some reading to do there. It also gets a mention in this paper
[21] which says There are some renowned educational institutions in Murshidabad district which include Amtala High School. If Amtala were unbundled from this, I would say delete the other two. This might be a good idea, as we want to avoid a
WP:TRAINWRECK, which could occur if Amtala really is renowned.
Sirfurboy🏄 (
talk) 11:38, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
PROD countered. Per
WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES, articles about primary schools are only kept if they can be shown to meet
WP:NORG. That is not the case here. Indeed, this is an article about a kindergarten. Utopes(talk / cont) 01:59, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Weak keep It is also a story about a UK-based charity. I added a few references. Hopefully just enough to save this story.
Ruud Buitelaar (
talk) 04:05, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep per Ruud Buitelaar.
Tamsier (
talk) 03:06, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete - although happy to consider a suitable redirect. I'm sorry but there is just not enough information about this school, as is the case of the vast majority of junior schools. Yes, this one is a charitable venture. Lots of them are. There are now four sources on the page. I analyse these below (with the first SHOFCO source being the only one that was there prior to AfD). On my analysis we do not have anything that meets
WP:SIRS. There is almost nothing we can actually say about this school in an article. Source analysis:
Created with templates {{
ORGCRIT assess table}} and {{
ORGCRIT assess}} This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor.
SHOFCO is Shining Hope for Communities, US based, I think it is a charity, and with a focus on Kibera.
SHOFCO appears legitimate. I have not investigated too hard on that score because this source fails on SIGCOV
The link is dead, but it is dated April 2009, and archive.org has a copy of the article
[23]. There is no mention of this school at all in the article.
As there is no mention of the school, this is moot.
Fitzwilliam College Newsletter with news of an alumna, the school's founder.
There is a single paragraph telling us that Sarah Shucksmith, a former Geography student, founded this school in her gap year, and they are building a new school building. It's creditable, but it's not notable.
– It is reporting and this is primary per
WP:PRIMARYNEWS. However, as I know people will want to claim otherwise, and SIGCOV is not met anyway, I'll leave that as undetermined. It does not change anything.
This is a
WP:SPS - a blog is a self published source
– I have no reason to say the writer is unreliable, but this is still self published.
To be honest, this would be well short of CORPDEPTH, but I would give ground to this being a charitable work, not a corporation. There is a little information here from which a page could be written, but it really isn't much. A lot more is needed, but I'll give it a yes on this one.
Article created by a clear
WP:COI editor and fails
WP:GNG, and
WP:NSCHOOL. Redirect to British Schools foundation may be on the cards, but that article has notability concerns as well.
Allan Nonymous (
talk) 14:50, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Article was AfDed in 2014 and closed as no consensus per a part
WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES which subsequently was repealed in 2017. Since the previous nom, no new sources have come to light. Probably best if we redirect to
Nord Anglia Education.
Allan Nonymous (
talk) 04:42, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 04:28, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Fails
WP:NSCHOOL, and
WP:GNG. Only thing I could find in a search was a press release. Heck, it's not even the most notable LCIS school out there.
Allan Nonymous (
talk) 21:11, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
If sources aren't found, one could redirect either to
Aubonne (locality) or to
Nord Anglia Education (operator) though I think locality may be better. I'd have to check if Swiss newspapers covered this subject...
WhisperToMe (
talk) 04:07, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 22:18, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
My involvement in this nomination is entirely procedural; I have no opinion or further comment at this time. WCQuidditch☎✎ 19:45, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
OMG, thanks I must have not been paying attention when checking if there was any prior discussion on the talk page.
Moritoriko (
talk) 23:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 22:21, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. Fails
WP:ORGIN and
WP:GNG. The article has only one source and the subject doesn't seem to have significant coverage to prove its notability either.
ZyphorianNexus (
talk) 23:47, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
This article has been erased several times on Spanish Wikipedia (and is nor creation protected) for repeated efforts to promotionally recreate it. This suggests serious
WP:PROMO risk. In addition, the sources here aren't notable, all are either
WP:ROUTINE, or lacking
WP:DEPTH.
Allan Nonymous (
talk) 13:13, 29 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The Universidad Del Pacífico – Ecuador article deserves to remain on Wikipedia because it contributes to the encyclopedia's mission of providing comprehensive information about educational institutions around the world
Misunderstanding of notability: The repeated deletion attempts might be due to a misunderstanding of the university's notability. We should strive to improve articles with proper sources rather than deletion.
Improve the sources: If the sources used previously were not notable, we can find alternative sources that meet Wikipedia's criteria. There are plenty of reputable Ecuadorian news outlets about the university's achievements, programs, or events, even though most of these would be reptitive and not part of an encyclopedic entry.
Scholarly articles, news coverage, and government websites can be good starting points for finding reliable sources.
Comprehensiveness of Wikipedia: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that strives to be comprehensive. Deleting an article about a university in Ecuador limits the information available to users about higher education in the country. The following
List of universities in Ecuador used to include articles for each of the accredited institutions in the country. As of April 29th 2024 it seems that most of these articles have been deleted.
Notability
In general, most legitimate colleges and universities are
notable[1] and should be included on Wikipedia. For notability of sub-articles, see
relevant advice below. ... It is also important to bear in mind that anyone can set up an institution and call it a "college" or, in many countries, a "university", so that it is essential to be clear whether an institution warrants inclusion in Wikipedia based on that institution's use of these terms.
Government websites listing UPACIFICO and other universities as an accredited institution or mentioning its programs. Were part of the article prior to edits on April 29 2024.
Enhancing the Article's Quality:
A collective effort can be made to find and add high-quality sources that meet Wikipedia's notability criteria.
Despite this information being deleted because it was in "ugly tables"The article's content can be expanded to include information about the university's:
History and mission
Academic programs and faculty expertise
Research activities and achievements
Student life and campus facilities
Accreditation status
Addressing Promotional Concerns:
We can collaborate to ensure the article presents a neutral and objective viewpoint.
Promotional language can be replaced with factual descriptions of the university's academics, research, and student life.
Editors can focus on providing verifiable information about the university's history, faculty, programs, and accreditation status.
With regards to the concern regarding repeated promotional recreation on the Spanish Wikipedia, this shouldn't automatically lead to deletion on the English version as the translation of this article into spanish does automatically reflect the existance of the article in wikipedia.es. The editing communities on each language version have some autonomy.
Independent Efforts: I translated the article into Spanish, demonstrating it wasn't a mere copy-paste attempt. Additionally, you mentioned finding the article created by other editors, further suggesting independent interest in the university.
In my last edit on the Spanish Wikipedia my edit focused on adding a recognition which I had added to wikipedia.en, not promotional language, this led to the pages deletion, and blocking of my wikipedia.es account. Let me reiterate that wikipedia.es has a delitionist policy rather than a broader inclusionist perspective regarding knowledge.
Inconsistent Treatment: If you check [
Universidades de Ecuador] All universities in Ecuador have entries on the Spanish Wikipedia. The Universidad Del Pacífico – Ecuador which has been deleted (and now reroutes to the English entry) seems inconsistent with this practice.
Proposal for Moving Forward:
Perhaps a communication channel can be established between the Spanish and English Wikipedia editors to discuss the university and ensure consistent treatment.
I am more than willing to translate the Univerity entries in Spanish back into English in order to once again have a
List of universities in Ecuador with entries to the different Universtites.
Delete looks like an advert and fails
WP:ORG. Would reconsider if there are Urdu sources but there is no Urdu version of this article.
LibStar (
talk) 03:56, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I know it is unusual to delete a University - but I cannot find any online information about the University (except the bare fact that it is on Yemeni University lists - although I am not sure how old these lists are). It appears no longer to have a website. Links are either not orking or provide no helpful info. No obvious lkinks to anything else. The wiki page suggests the unbioversity is strong in nutrition - but
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9517972/ suggests it is not on the 2022 list of Yemeni universities awarding decrees in nutrition. Perhaps it has changed its name or amalgamated?
Newhaven lad (
talk) 09:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment The article is entirely unsourced (general external links are used as reference) and filled with original research. Before reaching a conclusion whether to delete or keep I think it'd be fair if someone draftified it and use sources then we could've judged it based on it's merit. But if it stands as is, then delete seems impending.
X (
talk) 19:27, 19 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 07:41, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 05:51, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The article states they have 375 students, which is not a university. Many of the claims look too much, and none are verified. From their own web page the number of faculty is very small. Making a Beowulf cluster is not notable. More significant coverage is needed, this fails almost everything.
Ldm1954 (
talk) 00:12, 14 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment State universities and colleges tend to be notable, although this is a comparatively minor vocational one. It appears reasonably likely that
WP:SOURCESEXIST, but searching in Cyrillic is difficult for many of us.
Russ Woodroofe (
talk) 09:28, 14 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Undecided. Universities are normally notable, although even by North Macedonian standards this one appears to be quite small (the other public universities in North Macedonia for which we have articles each have more than 10 times as many students as this one). Yes, searching in Macedonian is difficult for us here, but the
article in the Macedonian Wikipedia isn't that much better. At worst, though, redirect to
List of universities in North Macedonia rather than deleting this article. --
Metropolitan90(talk) 04:23, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep. We have generally kept universities founded by statute. --
Necrothesp (
talk) 12:12, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Seconding the policy question. Also, as I stated in the original nomination, I could not verify the claims -- maybe someone else can. For instance, I am doubtful about all the claimed collaborations with universities many times their size, the 14 BA & MA degrees, the ranking. I could not verify any of these. It is easy to write on a web page, but normally we look for verifiability,
WP:N.
Ldm1954 (
talk) 19:08, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
No, I am still asking for a policy that says specifically that we are keeping "universities founded by statute". WP:CONSENSUS does not state that. And saying that we keep universities because we kept universities in the past because we kept universities in the past etc. is a circular reasoning. Not based on any policy. The Bannertalk 17:11, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep -- the top level polytechnic of a nation that was founded by the national government is a notable act in itself. There are numerous US institutions with fewer undergraduates (
Caltech) or even 1/10th of the total number of students (
Deep Springs College) that are notable, so the size of the institution isn't a determining factor; the significance of the institution to a nation's identity is a glimpse at the importance to a people. --
Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert(talk) 10:37, 16 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Two points:
Please check your numbers, you are way off. Caltech has close to 3 times (1023) the number of undergrads per year, to compare to the total number of 357 for both BS & MS, plus Caltech admitted 1440 grads.
https://registrar.caltech.edu/records/enrollment-statistics
You ignored the key point -- essentially nothing on this Wikipedia page is verifiable. The
Deep Springs College page has 37 sources, plus stacks of other material that verifies notability.
I politely request that you demonstrate their notability if you want to defend them.
Ldm1954 (
talk) 12:20, 16 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Neutral If we are to evaluate only based on the inserted references, then this fails every notability guideline, but if sources in foreign (local) language exist, and are promptly introduced, then things could change. I feel it's necessary that someone with proficiency in the local language performs some searches and shares the results.
X (
talk) 19:09, 19 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Policy based input would be helpful. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
StarMississippi 02:27, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete with no prejudice against recreation if sources become available. I conducted some searches in Macedonian but failed to locate significant secondary source coverage. Right now we are doing no service to our readers by having an article unsupported by sources making various dubious claims.
AusLondonder (
talk) 10:39, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment. Redirection to
List of universities in North Macedonia is an excellent alternative to deletion. I'm on the fence as far as independent notability, leaning very very slightly on the keep side, essentially per the argument of
Necrothesp.
Russ Woodroofe (
talk) 11:20, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Simply stating we have kept other articles is not an argument.
AusLondonder (
talk) 14:57, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Weakish keep. I got some help from one of our students here with language. There's an interview with the vice-rector
[27], which we probably can't use for facts, but which I think contributes to notability. Substantial piece in
Makedonsko Sonce on a potential reorganization
[28]. There's coverage in national newspapers related to a labor disagreement
[29], and in context of national university organization
[30] (for example, lots of stories of the latter type). Lots of coverage in Ohrid News, for example
[31][32][33][34]. I found perfoming Google site-searches for "Универзитетот за информатички науки и технологии" to be helpful. Overall, I'm seeing enough consistent coverage over time for a reasonable notability case. As other editors have been saying, this is as one would expect for one of a small number of state universities. I am not impressed with the comparison with CalTech, but I think it might be helpful to compare with e.g. the
University of Maine School of Law: a small technical school that is nonetheless of regional importance and wider interest, and that is appropriate for encyclopedic coverage.
Russ Woodroofe (
talk) 13:25, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Sorry, I didn't mean to connect reputation to Caltech -- and Deep Springs, Harvey Mudd, or University of Main School of Law is a better analogy to what I meant as my point that size of institution in itself isn't a determinant of notability. Thanks for the better comparison. --
Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert(talk) 20:17, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: I don't see a consensus here. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 04:39, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Most substantial source cited is a student newspaper article from time of construction. Further searches suggest that neither original construction or recent developments appear to have generated significant independent coverage. All coverage is from university or contractor press releases, or passing mentions as location of various departments. No indication building meets
WP:GNG or
WP:NBUILD.
Triptothecottage (
talk) 23:17, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Subject is not independently notable (and notability is not inherited from its unquestionably notable parent organization).
ElKevbo (
talk) 21:54, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I like the redirect ATD proposed by
Reywas92. I guess there's some benefit in having it the result of a AfD (now that we're already here) in that it's harder to revert.
Russ Woodroofe (
talk) 10:20, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Subject is not independently notable (and notability is not inherited from its unquestionably notable parent organization).
ElKevbo (
talk) 21:57, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Subject is not independently notable - notability is not inherited from its unquestionably notable parent organization
ElKevbo (
talk) 11:21, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Subject is not independently notable - notability is not inherited from its unquestionably notable parent organization.
ElKevbo (
talk) 11:24, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Subject is not independently notable - notability is not inherited from its unquestionably notable parent organization
ElKevbo (
talk) 11:26, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Subject is not independently notable - notability is not inherited from its unquestionably notable parent organization.
ElKevbo (
talk) 11:29, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 06:25, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirect to
Webster University#Campus. If it doesn't exist there, merge the
citation so the source of the full list is still available to readers. ~
Kvng (
talk) 15:22, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose a redirect, it's not a plausible search term.
AusLondonder (
talk) 15:50, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Despite being a large article, it appears to have been mostly edited by COI editors and contains
original research that isn't backed up by sources. The far majority of references are simply from the university's website, and as such notability isn't proven due to the lack of outside sourcing. ~
Eejit43 (
talk) 01:40, 9 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirect - and selectively merge any content with reliable independent sources to
University of Colorado School of Medicine. As the nominating editor stated, article seems promo and lacks secondary sources.
4.37.252.50 (
talk) 01:25, 13 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello Eejit43, thank you for the valuable feedback! I am presently retrieving outside sources to backup the information presented in this article. I am aware of the problem of promotion of interests on WP and how many hide their identity. My hope is that being transparent will help, along with the pending external citations that will demonstrate impact and notability both locally and nationally.
Mikepascoe (
talk) 13:28, 13 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello all,
An initial draft of the article had 31 cuanschutz.edu (internal) sources + 23 external (independent) sources = 54 total.
The present version now has 19 internal + 42 external source = 61 total.
The percentage of sources from the university website (Eejit43's original comment) has decreased from 57% to 31%.
Further improvements can be made, thank you for your continued review
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 03:10, 16 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment I'm not really seeing any SIGCOV from secondary sources. A selective merge might still be the best way forward.-
KH-1 (
talk) 04:25, 16 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello, could you please explain what a selective merge is and how this is a good way forward?
I'm also not sure how to satisfy the SIGCOV (significant coverage?) requirement. There are several external sources discussing the Program now from refutable sources. Do you have an example of a source that meets SIGCOV from other Wikipedia articles?
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting as there is no consensus. It would also help if an editor(s) would address
User:Mikepascoe's valid questions here. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 01:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Final relist. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 06:14, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
School or university organisations proposed for deletion
To check articles which are being proposed for deletion search by date at
Category:Proposed deletion or see the summary of PRODs at
User:DumbBOT/ProdSummary. It is common to find schools of all types on this list.