Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Secular Homeschooling

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. Black Kite (talk) 08:21, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Secular Homeschooling[edit]

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

Unneeded content fork. The existence of a separate "secular homeschooling" article would imply that homeschooling (without an adjective) is inherently non-secular (i.e. religious), but the existing homeschooling article gives no indication of that, and gives proper weight to the concepts of secular and religious homeschooling. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:17, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:51, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

~~Merge~~ to homeschooling. Everything in this article would be neatly contained in the main article and can split out summary style if the section became too large for that article. Also the "h" in homeschooling should be lowercased by title conventions, and the article is very US-centric as it stands. – czar 21:53, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and redirect to homeschooling, going along with consensus. All I wanted to merge was [1], but someone can just add that to the main article on their own if they want. – czar 18:49, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It's not clear that there is a lot of validly sourced material to merge. I'm not entirely sure the article wasn't created merely as a coatrack for the links to the secular homeschooling website that its primary source. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 22:02, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, there isn't a lot to merge besides the WaPo source. Still, "secular homeschooling" is a worthwhile search term for cheap redirection. – czar 23:18, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merge - this is clear to me that it is an advertisement masking a fork by way of a coatrack. Bearian (talk) 20:56, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I am usually in favor of redirecting where there is a likely target, but I oppose a redirect or merge in this case. This title is inherently POV, seeming to imply that secular homeschooling is different from regular (i.e., religious-based?) homeschooling. As WikiDan points out, the current Homeschooling article is well balanced; a redirect or merge would create all kinds of POV assumptions and implications. --MelanieN (talk) 03:23, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Secular homeschooling" is not any more inherently POV than fundamentalist Christian homeschooling. Both describe specific but major facets of current homeschooling, covered under the umbrella of homeschooling. They are both topics that readers will want to read about, have been covered in sources, and should be covered in an encyclopedia summary style. Simply redirecting the phrase to the major article implies no POV-pushing. – czar 03:59, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I see that there is a redirect from Christian homeschooling. In that case, a redirect from "Secular homeschooling" would also be acceptable. First it will be necessary to delete per G6 the existing page at Secular homeschooling, which is a redirect to Secular Homeschooling (magazine); then move this article to "Secular homeschooling" with a small H; then redirect it to Homeschooling. --MelanieN (talk) 08:40, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a content fork of Homeschooling. Merge info if necessary. Carrite (talk) 14:48, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:34, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - pointless —Мандичка^YO 😜 08:12, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete since 60% of the references lead to secularhomeschool.com, it feels safe to say it is an advertisement. Regards,Jeff5102 (talk) 07:50, 22 July 2015 (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.