Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Masters in Applied Positive 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 was Delete. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-12-29 06:48Z

Masters in Applied Positive Psychology (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Non-notable university program and unencyclopedic. ju66l3r 15:31, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, most university programs aren't notable and there's no sign this one is an exception. Spammy besides. Pan Dan 15:34, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - just a regular university program with no sign of anything noteworthy about it. Jayden54 18:05, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Individual university programs, whether at the graduate or undergraduate level, are almost, if ever, notable. Each university is going to have tens of programs. My university, for example, has something like 25 different Masters programs. No way we can have articles for all of them. --The Way 20:11, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - I just rewrote the article. What was there before made no claim to special notability, but in fact the program would be regarded by some as being not only the most natable program out there (in the field of psychology), but a sign of a revolution in psychology itself, of a new emphasis. It is certainly not just another university program, but I agree with Jayden54 and Pan Dan (and implied by The Way) that the former version of the article gave no indication that it was noteworthy. I added the following to the article:

"Positive psychology", the study of optimal human functioning, is an attempt to respond to the systematic bias inherent in psychology's historical emphasis on mental illness rather than on mental wellness. Some humanistic psychologists developed theories along these lines, but without solid empirical support. The pioneering research of a new generation of psychologists has led to a renewed interest in this approach, providing a firm scientific foundation for the study of human happiness and optimal function, thus adding a positive side to the predominantly negative discipline of psychology. In this sense the program is unique, representing a very important milestone in opening this important area.

I'd appreciate giving this article a chance to improve and demonstrate its notability (if the present version is not sufficient for people already) rather than just deleting it. -DoctorW 02:50, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - The content has no Neutral point of view. Tonytypoon 02:07, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - The understanding of WP:NPOV immediately above seems to contradict what it actually says on the cited page: "The neutral point of view: The neutral point of view is a means of dealing with conflicting views. The policy requires that, where there are or have been conflicting views, these should be presented fairly." If anyone feels that a view on the subject of the article has not been expressed adequately or fairly, please add it. -DoctorW 02:21, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete POV trash. CRGreathouse (t | c) 09:25, 28 December 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.