Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diversity in the classroom


 * 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   closed as keep, without prejudice to re-nominating. While valid grounds for deleting the nominated article have been given by editors other than the banned nominator, the stub currently at the article resembles that article so little that I think that the points they made are now academic. I also see no compelling reason (copyvio, libel) to erase the text that was here from history. It did contain pointers to references that could actually be used to make an encyclopedia article out of this. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 04:12, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Diversity in the classroom

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

*Delete - personal essay with original research a'plenty. An encyclopedia article could be written on the subject of diversity in education but the material here would require such a fundamental rewrite that it's best to start over. Are You The Cow Of Pain? (talk) 21:51, 22 September 2010 (UTC Struck comment of indef-blocked sockpuppet, User:Are You The Cow Of Pain? of sockpuppeter of User:Otto4711. JJ98 (Talk) 04:53, 26 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Wait a while - I posted some positive suggestions shortly after the article appeared in main space.  Let's give this editor a chance to improve the article and not send mixed messages.  Let's not bite a newbie.  If there is no improvement in a week, let us say, then I will support deletion. By the way, I mostly create new content, and another editor encouraged me to try new page patrol.  So, I am a newbie to this task. Cullen328 (talk) 22:49, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I put a note about the AfD on the new editor's talk page. Wouldn't it be best, Are You The Cow Of Pain, to read the article's talk page ito see if other editors are involved before nominating it for deletion? Just a friendly suggestion. Cullen328 (talk) 23:01, 22 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete a notable topic, but this is a terrible personal essay. Reads like some kid's homework, honestly. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  23:43, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I readily concede that this article has major problems. I also observe that it has four references that appear (at first glance) to be solid and on target.  I observe that this article is a first effort by a new editor - a "newbie".  I recall that we have a guideline that says "Don't bite the newbies."  Then, I observe that neither editor recommending deletion has taken the time to welcome the newbie, to offer constructive suggestions, or to make any substantive comment on the article's talk page or the user's talk page.  Is the goal to drive this new editor away from Wikipedia forever?  I certainly hope not.  We are dealing with human beings and human feelings here.  Maybe this article is hopeless, but what is the downside to reaching out to a new editor in a welcoming fashion and making an effort to improve a potentially promising article? Cullen328 (talk) 06:00, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Are You The Cow Of Pain? (talk) 06:04, 23 September 2010 (UTC) Struck comment of indef-blocked sockpuppet, User:Are You The Cow Of Pain? of sockpuppeter of User:Otto4711. JJ98 (Talk) 04:56, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I assume that you are acting in good faith and are overwhelmed by the volume of dreck that should be deleted. I have twice conceded that this article may need to go.  I don't think I've ascribed "sinister motives" to you or the other editor recommending "delete".  If you can explain how I did, I will offer my profound apologies.  I speak as a new content provider trying in my own mind to balance deletionism vs. inclusionism.  I have a strong motivation to welcome well-meaning newbies even if first efforts fall short. That's my approach which I believe is integral to the Wikipedia way.  I am a newbie on new page patrolling.  All I ask for is a respectful debate.  Respect for me and respect for the new editor.  Am I asking for too much? Cullen328 (talk) 06:33, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't know how long the editor has been on Wikipedia, nor do I care. If I found the same article written by Jimbo Wales himself I would still put it up for deletion because it is a personal essay and cannot in my opinion be salvaged through any normal editing process. I didn't say that the editor was a bad person or that s/he'd done a bad thing. It's about the article, not the editor, and suggesting otherwise has no place in this discussion. Are You The Cow Of Pain? (talk) 06:58, 23 September 2010 (UTC) Struck comment of indef-blocked sockpuppet, User:Are You The Cow Of Pain? of sockpuppeter of User:Otto4711. JJ98 (Talk) 04:56, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Let me be clear and apologize at the same time. My question was rhetorical and not intended to be an outright accusation.  I do not really think you intend to drive newbies away.  However, I fear that may be the unintended consequence of your well meaning recommendation to delete.  I truly assume that your intentions are good.  However, I have been in the position of adding an article in good faith and having a pro forma AfD posted in minutes.  It was a shock.  Visit my user page. See what I've contributed.  I don't claim to be the world's best Wikipedian, but I think I've made some valid contributions.  You say you don't know or care how long this editor has been involved.  I know and I care.  This editor is brand new.  "Don't bite the newbies."  Do you agree or disagree? What is the harm in taking a welcoming, supportive attitude for one week?  Cullen328 (talk) 07:35, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I don't believe it is helpful to sidetrack this discussion into a completely different one about ettiquette. Keristrasza (talk) 09:03, 23 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete I'm sure that it has a place in a teaching journal or similar, but without a comprehensive rewrite - which would probably retain only the title of the article - I cannot support keeping it. Per WP:NOT, WP:NOTESSAY. Keristrasza (talk) 08:54, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.
 * Delete. An essay of original research.  This reads like homework, and specifically homework where a certain page length or word count was demanded in the assignment, which of course leads to such things as entire paragraphs discussing the definition of "classroom".  - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:13, 23 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Speedy close and renominate if neccessary by some other editor. Nominator User:Are You The Cow Of Pain? has been indef-blocked as abusive sockpuppet of puppetmaster User:Otto4711.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 03:17, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. Not sure that's necessary.  The speedy keep guideline says, "The nominator is banned, so they are not supposed to edit. In that case, the nominated page is speedily kept while the nomination can be tagged with  and speedily deleted as a banned contribution. However, if subsequent editors added substantive comments in good faith before the nominator's banned status was discovered, the nomination may not be speedily closed (though the nominator's opinion will be discounted in the closure decision)."  The way I read that is, if valid reasons for deletion are raised by other editors, the discussion should continue even if the nomination is from a user who later was banned. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 06:43, 25 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment - if someone will work on this wreck of an essay, I think it can be kept. Just not me, OK? 21:32, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep The nomination was made by a disruptive editor who has been banned. The topic is highly notable and respectable and there is a vast literature to draw upon.  Whatever the flaws of the first contribution, there is not the slightest reason to delete as our editing policy clearly mandates that we should seek to improve such early drafts rather than deleting them: "Even poor articles, if they can be improved, are welcome."  I have made a start on this. Colonel Warden (talk) 23:25, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Even those who have proposed deletion say that this topic is notable. Colonel Warden has already restarted the article, so there's no reason to delete it. Moreover, I'd note that this article is the creation of a novice editor, the first and only creation by that editor; such aggressive deletion of material only drives away new editors, and it's general protocol to not to delete such articles, but rather to userfy or, if the topic is notable, keep help improve the article as per WP:NEWCOMER. Since te rewriting process has begun, it's fine to leave the essay in the history, as it gives credit to the newcomer for discovering that the topic was missing from Wikipedia. — Code Hydro  23:42, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: The article under discussion here has been flagged for rescue by the Article Rescue Squadron.    Snotty Wong   chatter 15:45, 26 September 2010 (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.