Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Academic probation (2nd nomination)

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 Speedy Keep per WP:SK #2 and WP:SNOW as this is obviously not going to be deleted. Kudos to Uncle G for showing how it's done yet again. Colonel Warden (talk) 12:11, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Academic probation

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

Unreferenced for nearly four years, fails WP:V. PROD a year ago for this reason was contested with a bare assertion that sources exist and an AFD was closed as keep for the same reason, but the burden of proof is on those seeking to include content — a burden which was not discharged by the dePRODder, or anyone else who commented, in the last year. I must therefore conclude that the sources which users alleged must exist are not in fact available. I invite users claiming otherwise to WP:PROVEIT. Stifle (talk) 11:36, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There really wasn't a need to take this to AFD if you wanted to upset those people again. Abductive clearly didn't read the book that xe so merrily cited in the last AFD discussion (There was a source cited.), but that doesn't mean that you shouldn't either. I've rescued the article for you, using the source that was cited the last time around. ☺ Uncle G (talk) 13:13, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment this is not the only meaning. its also a term used for students who have done poorly, and must improve grades to maintain their standing at school.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 15:00, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- That is actually called scholastic probation, you know. ☺ Uncle G (talk) 16:01, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:27, 1 September 2010 (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.