Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Logistics Proponency Office Internship
- 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 No consensus (to delete); hence, keep. Joe 21:18, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD. The article's subject is a Department of Defense internship; it is, it should be said, broader in scope that a traditional internship, inasmuch as the program seems designed to produce career employees. Nevertheless, the program is non-notable and the level of information in the article unencyclopedic. A merge to the relevant defense agency might be considered, but I don't think such disposition to be appropriate; hence, delete.Joe 18:26, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Update: In view of my own inclinations and the suggestion of KillerC, I've moved the article to Logistics Proponency Office and refactored it such that the topic is no longer an obscure internship. The article, I readily admit, is altogether shoddy, if only because the original provided very little detail on which to go (though it also seems exceedingly difficult to find much good info on the Office), but I think it's now encyclopedic enough that I can support weak keep (the "weak" qualifier is because I'm not certain that the Office is sufficiently notable and think it probable that we should merge into Transportation Corps, but I also find that we've a ton of articles on similarly-styled offices within divisions within corps for the United States Army, so there's no clear answer...) Joe 17:20, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete this training brochure. I would say salvage what can be salvaged and move to Logistics Proponency Office, but there's not enough here which isn't Internship specific to make a stub out of. KillerChihuahua?!? 18:57, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as per Joe. Very good nomination. -- Kjkolb 09:11, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I nominate keeping this entry. This is a very good entry, and very informative. With the new changes, I think this website is very informative and should remain - --155.217.1.34 15:11, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, although possibly trim. I think it's a little messy, but not unencyclopedic. Stifle (talk) 00:25, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The new version is substantially different from that I nominated for deletion, so I wouldn't be altogether opposed to "keep"; nevertheless, the internship should not be the title or focus of the article. Might you support a move to Logistics Proponency Office and a cleanup such that the article focuses on the ostensibly notable agency, as against the internship? Joe 19:05, 3 May 2006 (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.