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 of the debate was delete. Mailer Diablo 08:46, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article concerns small scholarship program serving thirty students a year. Article is totally unsourced except for link to scholarship program itself and reads like a press release. Source of assertion that this is "widely recognized as one of the most innovative collegiate merit scholarships in the U.S." appears to be UNC press release [1]. Subject is not notable, particularly when compared with other scholarships in this category serving thousands of students. Lastexit 14:02, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as non-notable. --Ed (Edgar181) 14:53, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - While this does have a small number of students, and I agree we could get thousands of similar articles, is there any consensus about how large a scholarship needs to be to get an article? (Certainly I think that independent articles for every elementary school in America is insane, but that's how consensus fell) RGTraynor 14:55, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per my nom. Article has been revised since nomination to remove the unsubstantiated puffery, which only underlines the notability issue. UNC-Chapel has 16,700 undergrads, which makes size of program even less consequential. Despite revision, article remains essentially a glorified press release, written from information provided by the scholarship, contrary to WP:NOR and WP:V. --Lastexit 19:04, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – although it did read like a press release (as noted above), the article is fixed now. IMHO the subject is notable enough; it is a link between two colleges that are traditionally rivals, and it seems to be fairly prestigious. (Full disclosure: I wrote the first version of this article, though I don't have any ties to the scholarship, the benefactors, or the colleges.) --bdesham ★ 20:23, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Article isn't a press release any more. I added a very little bit more. I found independent, reliable sources for the existence and basic terms of the program. I also found a couple undergraduate level research papers acknowledging the program as the funding for it. But I didn't find enough to make me sure the article should be kept. I also think that RGTraynor's comment above is cogent - is there any consensus on scholarships? GRBerry 00:28, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.--Ezeu 03:21, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete 30 students between two colleges? You must be kidding me. Not that every scholarhip deserves an article, but those that do are national or even international ones with GREAT prestige (Rhodes Scholar) or ones with hundreds of recipients. This is NN. Hobbeslover | (talk) (contribs) 03:31, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete nice but not notable. Bejnar 04:04, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete wrong side of the line. Wile E. Heresiarch 04:50, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, nn. --Terence Ong 13:58, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete nn digital_me^(t/c) 21:07, 30 May 2006 (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.