Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Advanced Academic Strategies

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, not sure why it has not been speedied--Ymblanter (talk) 07:52, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Advanced Academic Strategies[edit]

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

This article is purportedly about a course taught in a particular Texas school district. No sourcing is supplied to establish notability, nor did I find any in my searches. Arxiloxos (talk) 05:53, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, the details of the article appear to conflict in many respects with the information about the course as contained in the school district's website (see http://www.cfisd.net/files/1413/9532/7228/hscourse.pdf , pp. 11, 30) raising questions about whether it may have been created as a partial hoax. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. Cheryl Corbett Salyards Middle School for similar concerns in another article created by the same editor. --Arxiloxos (talk) 14:41, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:19, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:19, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is clearly a joke, as is Dr. Cheryl Corbett Salyards Middle School by the same author. Jacona (talk) 13:54, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - it appears from this that there is such a course, but (a) I find no coverage to indicate that it is notable or of more than local interest, (b) the article title does not relate to the content, (c) the details in the article are not supported by the only source, and (d) the author's other article was an undoubted, silly hoax. JohnCD (talk) 22:07, 16 April 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.