Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AP Human Anatomy and Physiology Principles

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:34, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AP Human Anatomy and Physiology Principles

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. A mere self-published announcement of a job posting is not enough to justify the existence of an article dedicated to an AP course that does not yet exist. — Mhawk10 (talk) 07:01, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. — Mhawk10 (talk) 07:01, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. — Mhawk10 (talk) 07:01, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. — Mhawk10 (talk) 07:01, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. — Mhawk10 (talk) 07:01, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. — Mhawk10 (talk) 07:01, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom, no evidence of notability Justi yaya 07:12, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:CRYSTAL— rsjaffe 🗣️ 08:07, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Rarely do I feel strongly enough to !vote to delete anything but this is an exception. The topic does not appear to meet our notability guidelines and, if it does, the guidelines are not providing appropriate guidance. Thincat (talk) 10:12, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There is nothing here remotely resembling an encyclopedic topic or article. Imaginatorium (talk) 12:25, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm left with no words. A job posting as source. Oaktree b (talk) 15:40, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, really snow delete at this point, since this clearly isn't notable. It should be obvious that articles shouldn't be based on job postings. --Adamant1 (talk) 18:13, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment for closer: please also check out Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AP Business Principles, which is related to this nomination. In hindsight, I probably should have multi-AFD'd them because of similarity, but we're a bit past that point now. — Mhawk10 (talk) 18:22, 13 March 2022 (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.