Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Randolph Community College


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 01:22, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Randolph Community College

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I have my suspicion that this article may have copyright issues, and in point of fact the deletion log for the page says that the article was axed on copyright grounds a while back. As its written now I have my concerns, in its current state with the maintenance tag I feel that an afd is warranted to determine the best course of action for the article. TomStar81 (Talk) 04:06, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  Everymorning   talk to me  04:22, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 18:06, 19 November 2014 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar ⨹   07:56, 26 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep: Established community college, part of a template for coverage of all the institutions in a United States' state system, just rewrite the thing if you have suspicions.--Milowent • hasspoken  13:50, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I spent a few minutes whacking out the baloney from the article and added two sources. It needs more work, but no reason it shouldn't survive now.--Milowent • hasspoken  14:22, 26 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES as well as the sources added. – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  20:21, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. Thanks Milowent for making revisions.  Thanks, i guess, User:TomStar81 for calling attention to the article and its possible plagiarism/copyviow, though I am not quite sure that opening an AFD is the most efficient way to do that.  Anyhow, seems like it should be kept now, per Davey2010 and others.  Tomstar81, if you are willing now to withdraw the nomination (and you or someone else could close it, as there are no other Delete votes i think), that would reduce the amount of community attention that must be applied.  No problem if this continues and is to be closed at end of 7 days as usual for AFDs, instead. -- do  ncr  am  22:48, 29 November 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.