Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leadership University (web portal)


 * 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. Per lack of significant independent coverage.  MBisanz  talk 06:51, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Leadership University (web portal)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete: not notable both per WP:WEB and per WP:GNG. All third party source mentions are 'trivial' (as that term is defined in WP:GNG). Further, two of the three third party mentions are only as an afterthought to parenthetical/footnote mention of the organisation that owns the website, Christian Leadership Ministries (Forrest, Pennock), the third is bare mention of a LU URL in this article. [Full quotation of these three sources can be found at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Leadership University (web portal)] Entry into evidence in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District was only to allow aforementioned trivial mention in Forrest statement (facts need to be entered into evidence before expert witnesses can cite them), and so does not add to notability. Remainder of article is cited to its own website (and a subsidiary one). HrafnTalkStalk(P) 05:13, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete no evidence of notability; seems to be mostly a press release. JJL (talk) 05:26, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep this article does have notability. Hrafn previously nominated the article for deletion and it was denied. The Web site has been referenced in a book on Intelligent Design published by MIT Press, and was referenced in the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District court case about curriculum. More importantly, as reported by The Desert Sun newspaper, the site has a role in Roe v. Wade as it is the home of the writings of Norma McCorvey (Jane Roe) who changed her views on abortion and became pro-life in 1995.--Sixtrojans (talk) 13:34, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: (i) Sixtrojans offers no evidence of notability, merely bare assertion. (ii) It was speedy-tagged, and the speedy-delete denied -- but that offers no impediment whatsoever for an AfD. (iii) I had already noted the trivial mention, as part of a parenthetical comment about CLM, in Pennock (the MIT Press book) above. (iv) It does not have "a role in Roe v. Wade" (only a tangential connection to it), and I had likewise already noted DS's trivial bare mention of a LU URL. Sixtrojans' claims are nothing but wild exaggerations of the facts. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 14:16, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Rebuttal: Hrafan has a strong bias against Intelligent Design and Christianity. The Leadership University Web site does house the largest collection of online articles about Intelligent Design from notable university faculty, yet for that he treats the subject with contempt. While his opinion may be that the book, newspaper and judicial references are "trivial," that does not make them "trivial." I for one believe these references are significant and have seen other articles on Wikipedia withstand deletion challenges with less third-party sourcing. The very fact that there is a heated discussion about the subject and the weight of third party sources lends credence to the need for an article.--Sixtrojans (talk) 15:42, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * No Sixtrojans, that was not a "rebuttal", it was a wild and unsubstantiated pack of (often irrelevant) assertions. Please read WP:GNG for an explanation of what "trivial" coverage means in this context. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 16:14, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * "Wild and unsubstantiated pack of..." let's tone down the rhetoric. Using weasel words to defame my character isn't productive to collaborative discussion.--Sixtrojans (talk) 16:47, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Additional Reason to Keep: I performed a Google search on LeaderU.com and found over 38,000 pages linking to this site. I have not gone through all 38,000 search results yet, but I have already found an article that ran in the Christian Post where LeaderU.com was the main subject matter. As a secondary point, I was struck by how many Web sites referenced LeaderU.com as a source for information about Intelligent Design and related topics.--Sixtrojans (talk) 17:29, 17 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Further comment: I needed information on a minor point of the Reformation in Germany. A search directed me only to Leadership University. The information seemed good, but I turned to Wikipedia for facts about the site. Well, the present article was good enough for me. Rather than delete this piece, it would seem useful to encourage readers to make it better and add citations. If we were to make the same rigid demands on all Wikipedia articles as has been proposed regarding this one, I foresee a wholesale slaughter.--Rafmagnsofn (talk) 15:08, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Without significant independent coverage, there is nothing on which to base this article. No prejudice to recreation if someone does treat them in depth. - Eldereft (cont.) 05:57, 20 February 2009 (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.