Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Why students may study abroad

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 WP:SNOW -Djsasso (talk) 13:09, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why students may study abroad

Not encyclopedic; also appears to violate several aspects of WP:MOS. See User:Globalecon/Global_Economics. Enigma ^message 21:22, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. 24.6.157.14 (talk) 21:24, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as this could be encyclopedic under a different title. (Trends in students studying abroad, or some such thing). Seems to be verifiable, and on a notable topic. Also, violating WP:MOS is most certainly not grounds for deletion. Bfigura ^(talk) 21:26, 28 April 2008 (UTC)Delete while there might be potential for an article on trends in studying abroad, I can't see a way to turn this essay into an article on that topic without a total rewrite with different/new sources. --Bfigura ^(talk) 21:34, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Also see Wikipedia:NOT#WEBSPACE. This is basically an essay. I don't believe it belongs in an encyclopedia. Enigma ^message 21:27, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment at present, maybe, but I think it can be cleaned up into an article. I'll take a stab at doing that. (And if it doesn't work, then I have no problems with changing my !vote). --Bfigura ^(talk) 21:30, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment changed !vote. --Bfigura ^(talk) 21:35, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, Wikipedia is not a free webhost. Nakon 21:55, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Well-sourced doesn't always mean keep. The main problem with this is in its style as an essay (and, indeed, it draws upon essays from several different sources). It doesn't have an encyclopedic tone; the section of Study abroad that this has been spun off from carries with it an original research tag. Wikipedia just doesn't lend itself to a "pros and cons" type article like this one, which promotes the horizon-expanding benefits of immersing oneself in a foreign culture. Mandsford (talk) 21:58, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. For a discussion of the class project of which this article is part, see WP:ANI#Use of Wikipedia for class project. Deor (talk) 22:16, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Article is clearly novel-synthesis of ideas, any sourced information could be added to existing articles, such as study abroad. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 23:09, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - this is a synthetic essay, not an encyclopedia article. Aleta ^Sing 23:13, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As a studednt paper, it constitutes WP:OR. Toast it and roast it. ThuranX (talk) 23:47, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Definitely a good essay (done for a class project, I believe), but not really the kind of article that belongs on Wikipedia. --clpo13_(talk) 00:07, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Too essay like with an essay-like title. Any sourced information here should go into Study abroad. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 00:38, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As the above users indicate, this article is an essay. A ecis^Brievenbus 00:59, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per above. Yahel Guhan 06:30, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete violates WP:NOR. Hut 8.5 06:33, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The MoS problems could be fixed (with a lot of work). But more importantly, it basically duplicates material in another article and violates WP:NOR. It doesn't belong in the mainspace. The article's creator has already copied it here: User:Lilbays1, so at least their work won't be lost upon deletion. It's a pity the professor who organized the project didn't read Wikipedia:School and university projects first. Many of the pitfalls could have been avoided. Voceditenore (talk) 08:17, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.