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 no consensus. After 3 weeks of discussions, it's still unclear where the community wants to go with this. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 14:03, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Campus placement (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)

Completely unreferenced article about a topic, written much more like a WP:HOWTO guide than an encyclopedia article. Wikipedia is not WikiHow, so the key to getting a topic like this in the door is not just to write a step-by-step guide to the process that's completely unsupported by any sources — what would be needed is an article that contextualized it with properly sourced independent analysis about it. For one thing, not all "campus placement" follows exactly the same process across the board: there can be regional variances in different locations, the process can change depending on the nature and needs of different employers and industries, and on and so forth, which is an example of the kind of thing that a properly written article would need to note and source. Furthermore, this has been flagged for both referencing and basic notability issues since 2010, without ever having seen any significant improvement on either front. I am, of course, willing to consider withdrawing this if somebody can actually repair the article with real sources and an encyclopedic tone, but after a decade in this state it's time to call the question. Bearcat (talk) 15:40, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 15:40, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. I can't even work out what the purpose of this article is: it clearly fails to meet standards in its current form, and I can't see how it could be re-edited into anything that might pass muster. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 17:30, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Stubify. The subject definitely seems to be notable. There is this book on the subject, and this book has a substantial section on it, as does this book, and there are many scholarly papers on the subject [1][2]. So I think that WP:STUBIFY very much applies here as after all the HOWTO stuff is removed there won't be much left. SpinningSpark 18:04, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - This needs to be drastically rewritten. No doubt. At the same time, the topic is absolutely notable. I agree with the above user's comment completely. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 15:03, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I stubbified the page. My informal impression is that "campus placement" is a more common term in India while "campus recruitment" is more so in the United States. Either way, it seems a worthwhile topic to cover — "how do college students get jobs" is obviously of social significance — although most of the sources turned up in a casual search are marketing glurge. XOR'easter (talk) 15:16, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. It's hard to see how this can be an actual article, and not merely a stub. And if it's a stub, then it's effectively a dictionary definition and Wikipedia is not a dictionary. erc ^{talk/contribs} 23:07, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Graduate recruitment, with which it is now redundant after the stubbification. That article, in turn, needs additional sources, but some of those have turned up (e.g., just to close my browser tabs, [3][4][5]). XOR'easter (talk) 00:45, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Well, why don't we kill both articles then merge it all into Recruitment? I mean, I guess since we're involving other articles, it's technically outside the scope of AfD, but what's special about college recruitment? I agree that the concept "how people (college students) get jobs" is notable, but is it notable separate and apart from recruiting people in general? Instead of having a random job fair or random ads, you place those fairs/ads within a university. That's not some unique, novel concept that needs its own wiki page. erc ^{talk/contribs} 15:41, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • I have no strong feelings about that one way or the other, but I suspect that there are enough details peculiar to recruitment at colleges specifically that a separate page is not a bad idea. For example, allowing the military to recruit on campus may be more controversial than their having recruiting offices downtown. XOR'easter (talk) 16:13, 21 April 2020 (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.