Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Australian university system

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. Daniel 03:15, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Australian university system (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) –

Unverified essay on the development and state of Australia's university system. POV issues raised on the talk page have not been addressed; regardless wikipedia is not a publisher of original, unverified research. Delete --Peta 06:06, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Deletion is not about current content of article - it is about whether the subject of the article is notable and several verifiable sources exist on the subject. This is a very interesting topic and it needs some work and referencing. :: maelgwn :: talk 07:54, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- :: maelgwn :: talk 07:54, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, probably rename to History of Australian university system. Seems like a reasonable retelling, and I'm not familiar enough with the topic to judge POV problems, but they are not a rationale for deletion by themselves. Please follow dispute resolution instead of using AFD. --Dhartung | Talk 08:15, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, this is an appropriate topic and new user Cynthia chang (talk · contribs) has made a great start. See British universities and Universities in the United States for similar articles; notice they both have sourcing problems, and probably NPOV as well. John Vandenberg 08:24, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, page needs to be fixed, but not deleted. Also the bazillion cite markers are probably not that useful either. Just a tag at the top would suffice. Recurring dreams 09:10, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, per John Vandenberg. Note from edit history that I tagged what was an essay for NPOV & original research, re-arranged into sections by decade & tried to re-write, but quickly got out of my depth. Bazillion cite markers were added in honest attempt to flag the trouble spots, since author was only changing what I flagged on the Talk page, but feel free to remove. Clicketyclack 09:50, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, probably should be renamed, but a topic worthy of having an article. Lankiveil 10:31, 17 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]
• Keep - maybe rename Think outside the box 10:50, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per John Vandenberg - possibly rename to Higher education in Australia? – Riana ⁂ 11:21, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per JVberg Twenty Years 11:45, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per John Vandenberg. It certainly needs cleaning up. For example, CSIRO does not duplicate universities and universities were doing research when CSIRO was started. They just were not offering Ph Ds. I think it can develop into a good article. --Bduke 00:42, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and cleanup. Notable topic. While the article obviously needs a lot of work especially on sources, it is worth keeping for the moment. Capitalistroadster 02:56, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Keep All the Keep comments thusfar reasonably sum up the good reasons for keeping it, which I simply cannot fault. Higher Education in Australia would be a more than reasonable name for the article. Thewinchester ^(talk) 05:25, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and rename. JJL 23:48, 18 May 2007 (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.