Talk:Army Correspondence Course Program
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Army Correspondence Course Program article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This page was proposed for deletion by 72.75.110.31 (talk · contribs) on 1 December 2008 with the comment: Article lacks sufficient Attribution for Verifiability of the Notability criteria. It was seconded by Matt57 (talk · contribs) on 2008-12-01 It was contested by Fg2 (talk · contribs) on 2008-12-02 with the comment: Removed deletion proposal. Objecting to deletion. Detailed references are in the article. |
Notice: This article does not verifiably establish WP:N
In my opinion, this article either does not verifiably satisfy the Notability criteria for one of the following guidelines for inclusion on Wikipedia: Academics, Biographies, Organizations and companies, Fiction, Music, Films, Schools, Web content, or it may violate the Conflict of interest guideline, or perhaps it is a Copyright violation.
Wikipedia articles must be based on reliable sources to verify any claims of notability. Even though the lack of reliable sources in an article is not grounds for deletion in itself, an article with absolutely no sources (or only external links to unreliable ones) suggests to some editors that multiple reliable sources may not, in fact, exist.
Although I am considering tagging this article for deletion according to the Deletion policy, I am nonetheless willing to assist User:Promotional (talk · contribs), and other recent contributors to this article, to make some constructive improvements to it ... I do not have time to examine this article in depth at the moment, and it may improve over time, in which case this warning was premature.
Please respond on this Discussion page, instead of on my Talk page, in order to avoid fragmenting the conversation.
To better understand why I have used this template, please read Flag templates for deletion warnings ... I realize that some of the expressed possible concerns may not be appropriate in this case. Happy Editing! — 72.75.110.31 (talk · contribs) 19:24, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
- The author removed the
{{Articleissues}}template without comment, but I restored it ... there are no references or external links, and I do not feel that it meets the WP:Notability criteria for inclusion, so I have proposed it for deletion. — 72.75.110.31 (talk) 20:19, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Contested PROD
User Fg2: I cannot find any "references" in the article, let alone "detailed" ones. — 72.75.110.31 (talk) 03:26, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
this is actually a group project ....
Um, it might be better to give the article text some time to grow. This is actually a group project that we will simply move to another Wikipedia location that you may or may not be able to find. If you really are worried about official references, there are many -- too many to count -- as the program has been around for 50 or so years. The general idea is to provide a much-needed explanation of the Army Correspondence Course Program for U.S. Army soldiers and other service members to assist with their promotion efforts. Staffwriter (talk) 15:12, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Doug, let's move everything to the various proponent pages. I guess what they're attempting is to censor military items before the information makes it into print, a typical socialist ploy. The thing that caused Wikipedia to succeed was the lack of editorial restraint. They can try to capture new information items as they appear, but there's no way they can review every Wikipedia page for changes and additions. Promotional (talk) 03:08, 3 December 2008 (UTC)