Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/College dating

College dating

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

Original research. Certain propositions may or may not be supported by the references, but the overall article is on a topic that isn't covered as such by sources. No need for content fork. ^Bongo_matic 06:48, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete based on current content. The article does not even stick to its ostensible topic very well. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 08:39, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The subject is notable (over 2k Google Books hits), many (over 1k) mentions in academic journals (for example, a source listed on talk: [1]). The article is currently poorly referenced, but while this is a reason to tag it with OR/various citation needed templates and such, it is hardly a reason to AfD it - particularly when a simple look at the talk page (which I see no indication the nominator have done), would suggest that this article is in the process of being developed (as part of an educational assignment). In such a situation, where it is clear that there are editors who want to improve this article in the the near future, if you want to help, going to the talk page and explaining the problems is known to be much more helpful, instead of the quite less friendly "AFD the n00b's article" threat approach. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 16:56, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Piotrus. Notability looks pretty clear-cut to me.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 17:10, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 08:42, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 08:43, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]