Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University of Agriculture, Makurdi


 * 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) Mediran ( t  •  c ) 03:02, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

University of Agriculture, Makurdi

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article has been needing a rewrite since 2007, and, in its current state, does not appear encyclopedic. Although there is inherent notability, the article would be better deleted and started anew than in its current state. Uberaccount (talk) 23:54, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions.  czar   &middot;   &middot;  00:21, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  czar   &middot;   &middot;  00:21, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:28, 4 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep This is a university established by federal government recommendation, as now cited in the article, to meet specific needs of its locale. The article contains a lot of content which could be deleted if suitable citations cannot be found, taking the article down to something of a stub, but that is a matter for normal editing rather than deletion. AllyD (talk) 08:18, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. Agree with above. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  15:47, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - The nominator acknowledges that the topic is notable. The only thing at issue here is whether the state of the article is such that improvement would be better accomplished by deleting it.  In reviewing the article, it clearly states what the topic is, and provides sufficient information to be informative to a general reader audience.  I'd say the article is far away from needing to invoke the nuclear option.  What is needed is the normal collaborative editting process. -- Whpq (talk) 13:17, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep per AllyD. — Joaquin008  ( talk ) 10:46, 9 May 2013 (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.