Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Council for Higher Education in Newark


 * 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. WP:NPASR. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:16, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Council for Higher Education in Newark

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The individual institutions are certainly notable. The very loose consortium is another matter. It's only possible notable project is University Heights Science Park; if so, an article should be written about it. The high school long pre-existed the consortium--the connection is that it moved into a new building in science park.

Another highly promotional article accepted from AfC. (I've been concentrating on these lately, in the hope of raising standards there.)  DGG ( talk ) 00:05, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:11, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:11, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:11, 31 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:18, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:02, 16 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment. Why not support development of the article to cover the Science Park initiative, to be a combo article about CHEN the consortium and its projects, which apparently include the Science Park and the high school?  This could be advocated at the Talk page of the article.  With links to other articles about science parks, with possibly inviting other editors to help develop it.  The article does not seem promotional, it is not promoting anything commercial anyhow.  Is the goal with this AFD to get rid of the article or to spur development?  It seems intimidating to AFD it, and it kinda seems wrong to AFD it when the nominator acknowledges there is a worth topic within it (the science park) that could simply be developed further. -- do  ncr  am  15:41, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep So, with no one else commenting, to be consistent with my own comment, i !vote Keep to resolve this AFD. -- do  ncr  am  01:38, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 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.