Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Physics education in the United Kingdom

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 no consensus. Everyone seems to agree that the current article is severely lacking. However, there is no clear consensus for what the best solution to the situation is. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 11:25, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Physics education in the United Kingdom

[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)

It's not established that this specific topic merits its own article outside of Physics education and Education in the United Kingdom. The only source that goes towards establishing WP:GNG is a blog post, which has iffy reliability. Other sourcing is universities advertising their physics programs, and I mean there's one press release that gives a couple of sentences to physics. I'd expect more to establish notability. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:32, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:32, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:32, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I'd expect more consideration of alternatives to deletion. Such as merger into Physics education, which currently seems to be just about HK and the USA. And, as we covere other subjects at the UK level, it seems reasonable to keep this page too. See Category:Education in the United Kingdom by subject. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:29, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Selective merge to physics education per Andrew. "Selective" because it's so weakly sourced. But, in general, a merge seems sensible. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 16:58, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter (talk) 18:34, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - the general physics education typifies what mostly goes in physics education, whereas this UK article is about how sparse physics education is in the UK. I fail to see how North American editors would have the slightest insight into how physics is taught in the UK? Not enough people with insight have written reviews here - instead it's generic editors who patrol deletion discussions. The proposal to delete looks expedient and not hugely believable. More information should be added to the article, such as about the STFC for example?94.118.119.76 (talk) 10:52, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have insight as I had a UK education in physics. Merger to the more general page seemed sensible in that:

physics is not especially associated with local geography, politics and history and so the syllabus will tend to be similar in most countries
the UK education system has influenced other countries which may still use their examinations

But, on the other hand, we have topics of this sort for other subjects and so it would be inconsistent to do this one differently: see Category:Education in the United Kingdom by subject. I'll update my !vote. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:29, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The article title doesn't work for me. I expect that decent articles could be written about Physics education in Scotland and Physics education in England and Wales, but the subjects are distinct since the nations have entirely different education systems - separate curriculums, administered by separate organisations, offering different qualifications, with exams sat at different ages - they're different from the start of primary education all the way through to university level (with four-year degrees in Scotland compared to three-year degrees in England and Wales, which are funded completely differently). I guess we could cover it all at one location, but I don't see why we'd do that as you'd need to describe each of them completely separately. I don't know much about the situation in Northern Ireland, but for me this is either a merge to Physics education, or it needs splitting into different articles. GirthSummit _(blether) 09:45, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 05:54, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Perhaps I am just reiterating what Girth Summit said above, but this article is a mess, particularly about Scotland. My cohort and I learned from the "Physics is Fun" textbook from early teens, sat the O-grade at age 15-16, the Higher at 16-17 and then left school: the stuff here about GCSEs and trying to derive and compare age 18 school exam stats doesn't fit with that (uncited apples-and-oranges original research) or, I think, with the several subsequent rebuilds of the curriculum and introduction of the Advanced Higher, all of which go unmentioned here. Nor does it cover the place of Physics in the historical Scottish university curriculum. Perhaps the article could be improved to address such deficiencies and cite or remove all the original research, but I think it would always show stress in the welds of differing systems. AllyD (talk) 07:35, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I must be a bit younger than you - I did my physics Standard grade exam aged 15, and my Higher exam at 16; I could have done a CSYS at 17, but I was too lazy and didn't need it to get into uni. None of which is encompassed by the sentence The Higher system of examinations [in Scotland] allow [sic] a greater spread of subjects to be taken at 18 - by the time I turned 18, my secondary education examinations were a (rather hazy) memory, and I had been at university for several months, which is not unusual north of the border.

I think the only answer is to Move this to Physics Education in England and Wales, perhaps someone will be interested enough to write one about Scotland at some point, but they are two entirely different subjects, they shouldn't be at the same title. I don't particularly want to see it deleted, I'm sure an article could be written about it, but not at this title. GirthSummit _(blether) 12:04, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - There is nothing in this article that warrants it having it's own page. Inexpiable (talk) 12:15, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Physics education, though I wouldn't object to a rename to Physics Education in England and Wales as above. Article needs tidying up, but AFD isn't cleanup. -Kj cheetham (talk) 18:05, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but rename: I believe education about a major field in science in a nation will meet GNG, there will be sources in journals and from conferences. The article needs work and it should be moved to an appropriate name. // Timothy :: talk 13:38, 2 November 2020 (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.