Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Center for the Study of Science Fiction

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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:32, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Center for the Study of Science Fiction

[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)

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:GNG. Lacks any truly independent sources. Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 03:45, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy, Organizations, Education, and Kansas. Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 03:45, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete this page - the lack of TRULY independent sources is largely due to a previous director who keeps trying to use the page to promote himself and his current project - every time someone tries to make the page better, he goes in and puts in the self-referential links instead. This Center is an important one, and we are trying to block users who are continuing to add circular, self-promotional material. 23.112.95.243 (talk) 02:24, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to allow the staff to update the page and maintain a page free from interference, we can start by blocking 2600:1700:5ac1:4c30:4d50:e524:219:22a7 from modifying the page (until he gets another IP, of course). Thanks. 23.112.95.243 (talk) 02:36, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

One account has been blocked and the page is semi-protected so that IP addresses cannot edit it. Propose changes on the talk page. Edit warring is unacceptable. And who, exactly is this "we" and "staff" you refer to? If you have an association with the topic, then you have a conflict of interest, and you should not be touching the article, but using the talk page instead. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:40, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So, if truly independent sources exist, where are they? Simply copy and paste the URLs or whatever in this discussion. Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 05:00, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 13:23, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Page initially created and edited by a former Center director, with multiple links to his website and a non-neutral POV. As above, those affiliated with Center also appear to be editing. Page should probably be deleted in keeping with conflict of interest policy. 2001:49D0:8511:3:683E:901E:3E2:CCCC (talk) 02:07, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per WP:TRAINWRECK. If this is a notable subject, interested parties could then create a new, policy conforming draft in AFC. 208.185.4.221 (talk) 21:39, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Update: there was significant logged-out editing going on and I've tried to put a stop to that. TRAINWRECK is applicable, but I'd prefer it if DISinterested parties created a new article. Drmies (talk) 16:51, 23 March 2023 (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.