Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AP Psychology

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 of the debate was keep. Mailer Diablo 15:23, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AP Psychology

Description of someone's high school class. Almost certainly a copyright violation out of a course guide; absolutely non-notable even if it's not. Keep in mind, this article isn't about the AP test itself, just someone's class. -Elmer Clark 02:03, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Agree with nom - nn course description. Eusebeus 02:26, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Current article not encyclopedic. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 03:10, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Legitimate stub on a verifiable, notable topic. It doesn't sound like a description of one particular class; it sounds like a description of the standard AP Psychology curriculum. We have a lot of pages on AP courses (Advanced_Placement#Subjects). --Allen 03:58, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Okay; looking closer I see that most of them were created by the same user three days ago. Still, they seem like legitimate stubs to me. --Allen 04:00, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep. Isn't the AP Psychology course standardized internationally? It's not a course specific to any one school. TheProject 04:36, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I think it's certainly safe to say that the course, although it covers pretty much the same material everywhere, is not taught always identically - certainly not with those same units always in "Semester B." Even if it were, what would be the point? An article on the AP Psychology test would make much more sense than this. -Elmer Clark 05:43, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

It's definitely not standardized internationally. Not all countries have a college system, and most countries have no AP system. In fact, I was completely clueless as to what "AP Psychology exam" in the article might refer to until I saw JzG's contribution below. --Lambiam^Talk 11:54, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. Encyclopedic article can be written on topic. Current state of content is irrelevant, {{sofixit}} . Loom91 08:36, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, looks too specific to one high school. JIP | Talk 09:41, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete lacks context, apart from anything else, but what this article says is that the AP Psychology course prepares students for - wait for it - the AP Psychology exam! Who knew? Oh, and it does it without defining "AP". Or giving any hint as to why we should care. Can it be worked up into a valid article? Who knows. Do we need to keep its seat warm while we wait? Absolutely not. This is a non-article. And the concept is more than adequately covered at Advanced Placement anyway. Just zis Guy you know? 09:57, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

• change to keep since it is now a completely different article about a different subject, namely the exam (standardised) instead of the course (not). Just zis Guy you know? 22:57, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

• Strong delete per JzG. We can certainly wait while someone writes another proper article on the test itself. Kimchi.sg 11:54, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. There are articles for a lot of other AP subjects. It obviously needs cleaning up and making it more about the subject and exam. DarthVader 12:08, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

• A lot? I found one: AP Biology. Others (e.g. AP Math) redirect to Advanced Placement, which seems fair since the encyclopaedic content appears to be that AP Foo is a course which prepares students for the Advanced Placement Foo exam. Absent evidence of a uniform curriculum in the courses there's not much to add, is there? Just zis Guy you know? 12:45, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

• I was able to find 32 others. If we want to delete this for non-notable we should really be voting to delete all of these pages at once: AP Biology, AP Calculus AB, AP Calculus BC, AP Calculus, AP Chemistry, AP Chinese Language and Culture, AP Comparative Government and Politics, AP Computer Science A, AP Computer Science AB, AP English Language and Composition, AP English Literature and Composition, AP Environmental Science, AP European History, AP French Language, AP French Literature, AP Human Geography, AP Latin Vergil, AP Latin Literature, AP Macroeconomics, AP Microeconomics, AP Music Theory and Composition, AP Physics B, AP Physics C, AP Spanish Language, AP Spanish Literature, AP Statistics, AP Studio Art 2-D, AP Studio Art 3-D, AP Studio Art Drawing, AP United States History, AP United States Government and Politics, AP World History. Some of these are similar to the way AP Psychology was when it was nominated, but there are a number that already have some real information on them even though they started off poorly. If we really want to delete this article based on non-notable, then someone should set up a single discussion for the deletion of all 32 specific AP exam/course pages that have been created rather than going through AfD 33 times over. On the other hand, I think they could all be expanded into real articles... —Jnk 15:58, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete x 33 Ewlyahoocom 21:51, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as per users above. --BDD 12:51, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per users above. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEMES?) 13:09, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Loom91's argument above. —Jnk 13:37, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I just took a quick stab at revising the article to make it more encyclopedic (removed random reference to "semester b", etc.,) and I stubified. Take a look, but it still needs work. —Jnk 13:55, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

• Weak keep now that article has been stubbified. Context has been injected, and there is at least a little hint of what "AP" means. Kimchi.sg 14:38, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Non-natable course. Beno1000 14:58, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - covered adequately in Advanced Placement. FreplySpang (talk) 15:34, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Not adequately covered (indeed, hardly mentioned at all) at Advanced Placement. —Cuiviénen, Friday, 5 May 2006 @ 15:40 UTC
• Keep on procedure, but suggest that a blanket discussion of the encylopedic merit of ALL of the AP articles be held and the decision should be applied across the board.Right now there is one (this one) on AfD, a prod or 2, and a bunch that just redirect back to Advanced Placement. That discussion should also include a naming convention discussion for all of these articles if they are deemed encyclopedic.--Isotope23 16:16, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep here and for all of them. It has been improved greatly since this nomination, with details that would make the Advanced Placement page huge and confusing. This isn't one of the more notable AP tests, but the notable ones are taken by huge numbers of high school students (much more than, say, the enrollment of any school considered notable). If the other ages are still stubs, then they can be similarly improved in the future. Rigadoun 18:25, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Ridiculous to suggest deletion. If anything, should have been tagged to merge with Advanced Placement Program Aguerriero (ţ) (ć) (ë) 18:55, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
• Now that the article discusses the TEST and not just some guy's class, I support Keeping it. -Elmer Clark 20:06, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as above. ProhibitOnions 21:12, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per others. Arbusto 22:56, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep nominator needs to have some common sense when listing... YOUR NOT SUPPOSED TO AFD STUFF THAT HASNT EVEN HAD A WEEK TO EXPAND ESPECIALLY WHEN ITS A NOTABLE SUBJECT! My god, subject is clearly a notable very widespread exam in north america. There are probably 50 different guides (published yearly) on how to pass it in any decent bookstore. A simple google pulls up 161,000 results for the phrase "AP Psychology". How about next time you put a valueable stub instead? It would have probably taken as much time as it did for you to go through the 3 step AFD process.  ALKIVAR™ 01:19, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

  Comment, wow... the claws really came out on that one. I agree with you in principle up until the statement on putting up a stub instead because you presume the nominator has a passing knowledge of/interest in the subject. Better suggestion would be to tag the article for whatever problems it has (context, cleanup, verification, etc) and then give it some time to improve before bringing it to AfD. WP:CHILL never hurt anyone.--Isotope23 20:00, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

  • When people afd stuff without bothering to read the entire section marked Before nominating an AfD or otherwise reading directions I get pissed. Whatever happened to the days of people reading before wading in to something they dont understand?  ALKIVAR™ 23:45, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

• It depends how you view it. The subject of the original article - a non-standardised course for a program which already had an article - was unencyclopaedic. The rewritten article, about the (standardised) exam, is encyclopaedic. But to recognise that the article was salvageable by refactoring it to a different, albeit related, subject, did require lateral thinking, and it seems harsh to castigate the nominator for failing to make that leap. Enough people voted delete before the rewrite to indicate that it is certainly not as unambiguous as you make out. Just zis Guy you know? 23:52, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
• I would likewise encourage you to read the version of the article I submitted for deletion before lambasting me. The original article had absolutely nothing to do with the AP test itself. I assumed that any article about the actual test would be located at AP Psychology exam or something. Chill out. -Elmer Clark 06:50, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

  I did, and could have written a 2 paragraph stub on the exam in the time it took you to list this for AFD.  ALKIVAR™ 17:19, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep and mark as stub. I'd personally like to suggest a category for AP tests. ~Kylu (u|t) 04:09, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep The original article was about a course, not an exam ("This college-level course prepares students for the AP Psychology exam") but it has expanded into an article about an important standardized exam recognized by many universities. Fg2 06:44, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. What in the world can be said about AP courses and examinations that's not already covered at Advanced Placement Program? -- Krash (Talk) 14:04, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
• Cautious keep It seems like it could be (majorly) cleaned up rather than destroyed. --Pilot|guy 18:39, 6 May 2006 (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.