- 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. Wifione ....... Leave a message 06:19, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
- Full Sail University ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The page is written like and advert and an overwhelming majority of the information in the article comes from FS own webpage, which is against WP:IRS. Most of the editors of the site seem to have a clear connection to FS and the article has a history of toeing the line of WP:NPOV. The article should be canned until neutral editors can find sufficient sources to create the article where the sources conform the WP:IRS and WP:V. Jmclark ( talk) 05:08, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
- Keep - This is definitely one of the least advert-like ones, there are so many articles which are much worse in every aspect mentioned by Jmclark than Full Sail University is. In addition, the "overwhelming majority" is less than half of all the references listed in the article. Full Sail is one of those articles that people wish to know about, but unless you've had some connection (former student, etc) to the school you're not likely to find out a lot about it through newspaper articles. Along those same lines (and this goes for a LOT of Wikipedia articles) unless you've had some connection with the article's topic, you're not likely to edit it. For example, even if I'm interested in researching topic X it is highly unlikely that I would edit the article if I saw a recent news release about it, unless I had a connection to it. "Clear connections" are how, IMO, 1/2citation needed? of the articles get updated. → ClarkCT Talk @ 05:38, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
- Keep the University has independent accreditation. However, I agree the article is in need of rewrite as it skates close to the line on WP:NPOV -- Whiteguru ( talk) 10:22, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k ( talk) 00:35, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k ( talk) 00:35, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- Keep - accredited degree-awarding institutions are notable. We don't delete pages for being promotional we clean 'em up. By all means go ahead and get busy with the scissors on any straight lifts from their website (copyvio) and any promotional stuff that is not independently reliably source. TerriersFan ( talk) 01:00, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- Keep and rewrite from a neutral point of view. Nearly the entire article is based on primary sources but the subject meets notability guidelines easily. History is worth keeping. RadioFan ( talk) 01:35, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- Keep as obviously notable, and not going to be deleted. Making suggestions on the talkpage about how to clean up potential problems would be better then nuking it. Blake ( Talk· Edits) 22:49, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- Keep per RadioFan. -- Joaquin008 ( talk) 19:23, 7 May 2011 (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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.