Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Early Journey of Life

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 merge to Monash University Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences. Daniel (talk) 20:44, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Early Journey of Life

[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)

Primary sources abound, unclear how this warrants a standalone article. Might be feasible to merge some of it to Monash University. nearlyevil 665 12:26, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. nearlyevil 665 12:26, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

are we sure wer're not discounting it because its a program in a non-English-speaking country of lesser concern to some of us here? DGG ( talk ) 01:31, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Monash University Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences. I don't see how the program warrants a spinoff at this time. gidonb (talk) 02:26, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:13, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 01:48, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - there is certainly coverage like this and plenty of citations by other early learning researchers like this. The name (there are two) is a bit confusing, especially since there are then Vietnamese translations of both. My view is that this is a notable body of work, well regarded by reliable sources and experts in the field, and that the totality of coverage across all four variant names is probably enough to get it over the line. Merging to one of the multiple participant organisations (especially one that isn't located in the country in question) seems a sub-optimal outcome. St★lwart¹¹¹ 06:26, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to have been a key component of an international conference held nearby. St★lwart¹¹¹ 06:34, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And it received a fairly significant award from Grand Challenges Canada. St★lwart¹¹¹ 06:34, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just looked at this again. Yes, it received an award, but Grand Challenges Canada is a key funding partner, so that's partially a self-congratulatory pat-on-the-back. No question the program does good work, but I'm still not convinced we're 100% there. St★lwart¹¹¹ 05:48, 12 August 2021 (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.