Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/California Basic Educational Skills Test
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 keep. Article needs cleanup, not deletion. (non-admin closure) | Uncle Milty | talk | 00:58, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
California Basic Educational Skills Test[edit]
- California Basic Educational Skills Test (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I have nominated the California Basic Educational Skills Test because of its reliability on useless references and its abnormal structure. JC · History · Talk · Contributions 02:57, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and cleanup. There is no question that this is an actual institution that effects tend of thousands of people. Finding good references should not be hard at all. bd2412 T 03:10, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep A GScholar search shows about 260 hits for the topic, GBooks shows dozens of books on CBEST and a GNews search shows many articles in the LA Times, the San Jose Mercury and the Sacramento Bee newspapers about this controversial test. A New York Times article indicates that CBEST is of national significance. It appears that this topic is highly significant. The article does have problems with some how-to sections and even a catalog of prices, but fixing these is a matter of editing; they are surmountable problems per WP:SURMOUNTABLE. A highly notable topic and surmountable article problems suggests keeping the article. --Mark viking (talk) 03:28, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- KEEP please. Wincent77 (talk) 20:00, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, emphatically. This test is well beyond the requirements for meeting WP:N. There are a multitude of references available, and the proper approach would have been to add new reliable sources and reorganize it as opposed to attempting a deletion. Transmissionelement (talk) 20:10, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:21, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:21, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:22, 26 September 2013 (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.