Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pensacola Christian College Demerit System

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was ambiguous.

The community concensus is clearly against the retention of this as an independent article. The decision is about split, however, between "merge back" and "straight delete". Noting that 1) this content is already present in the history of the parent article and 2) that it has no significant independent edit history, I am going to make the administrative call that this is a "delete" decision. GFDL attribution is preserved in the main article's edit history. Whether or not this content survives as a section of the main article is an appropriate discussion for that article's Talk page and is outside the scope of this VfD decision. Rossami (talk) 23:35, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Pensacola Christian College Demerit System

The material is not encylopedic. Vegaswikian 29 June 2005 17:55 (UTC)

• Merge back to Pensacola Christian College, where it was before. Another editor caught me sleeping and split it off into its own article. Sorry, we're just in the middle of an edit war over there. At any rate, no PCCcruft deserves its own article; I think it should all just be merged back. --Idont Havaname 29 June 2005 19:20 (UTC)
• Merge, per Idont Havaname. This is one of several articles that have been created that should be merged back. -Willmcw June 29, 2005 19:27 (UTC)
• Delete, maybe put summary of rules on Pensacola Christian College, like before edit. Other articles could also be deleted. Eriknikel 29 June 2005 21:20 (UTC)
• Keep, Some editors feel that it is better to put this gob of information on the main page. There are pages of information about this topic that could be added and this unclutters the main page by leaving a clean and obvious link to it.

It needs to stay here instead of on the main page where it is vandalized every thirty minutes by partisan editors. Otherwise the main page is a total waste of time. If you don't believe me, check the history of the parent page and you will see what is going on.

Some of the previous voters are obviously biased against the college and that isn't conducive to a fair entry. The edit war is a result of random users showing up and vandalizing the page with tons of POV information that would be better served to not be in the main entry.Shawn fard

• Delete as per Eriknikel. JamesBurns 30 June 2005 03:28 (UTC)
• Merge back. Radiant_>|< June 30, 2005 12:46 (UTC)
• Merge per Idont Havaname 29 June 2005 19:20 (UTC) Peter Grey 30 June 2005 14:02 (UTC)
• Merge back where it belongs, nn as its own article. .:.Jareth.:. ^babelfish June 30, 2005 16:53 (UTC)
• Delete. I don't agree that pages of encyclopedic information could be added about this topic (a disciplinary policy at a private college). This material belongs in a handbook, not an encyclopedia. Even if the policy were notable by being influential, unusual or barbaric, it would still only merit a mention on the main PCC page, not a comprehensive republication as a separate article. Dystopos 1 July 2005 16:21 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.