Talk:Pensacola State College

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Pensacola State College. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130805084719/http://pensacolastate.edu/campusinformation.asp to http://www.pensacolastate.edu/campusinformation.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100604150239/http://alumni.pjc.edu/ to http://alumni.pjc.edu/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:46, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Corsair

• Does anyone else think that the Corsair might be better served as its own article? It takes up an unusually large portion of the PSC article. -Navarre0107 (talk) 17:59, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
• Just double checking again, cause I can make this its own page if no one objects? - Navarre0107 (talk) 02:33, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
• Well its been almost two years, so I suppose I'll recreate the Corsair article as it's own page. Let me know if there is any disagreement to this - Navarre0107 (talk) 19:11, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Proposed merge of The Corsair (Pensacola State College newspaper) into Pensacola State College

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

To not merge, on the grounds that there are sufficient references independent of the source to meet GNG and for separate coverage. Klbrain (talk) 11:23, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

---

insufficient substantial third party sorucesinwr DGG ( talk ) 10:47, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

• Support selective merge. Much of the current article is either unsourced or fluff. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:41, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose The article could be cleaned up (especially the references) but even trimmed down a bit, it would be a big chunk of Pensacola State College following a merge. If merged, please keep the categories per WP:RCAT. Pichpich (talk) 20:10, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

• Pichpich - There's only about 3-4 sentences which are worth merging into the main article, the rest is fluff, what would you say to that? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:21, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

  I don't see that much fluff. There's the sentence "In addition, The Corsair has had photographs included in blablabla" (this could be nuked) and there's the awards and honors section. The latter could be toned down but it's legitimate to discuss the paper's recognition. Note that in the Pensacola State College article there's the unreferenced sentence "The paper is well awarded for a publication of its size and circulation." If you start referencing that statement, you'll end up with a paragraph that's not so different from the one currently in The Corsair (Pensacola State College newspaper). Pichpich (talk) 18:45, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose: Article can use some clean-up, but it’s not terrible for a college newspaper wiki article. When it was previously part of the Pensacola State College page, it made up an overwhelming portion of the article. I really do think it is better served where it is at the moment -Navarre0107 (talk) 20:23, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

• I've also found third-party sources to replace some of the primary sources on the article, they should be up now.-Navarre0107 (talk) 21:17, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

• Comment: This is fundamentally a notability question, not a quality one: If there is enough coverage, keep it, and if not, merge it. @Pichpich and Navarre0107: Which sources do you think qualify for GNG? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 17:32, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

@Sdkb:, I'm of the opinion that the non-locally written article and book that specifically discuss the paper as a topic (for different incidents in the history of the paper to boot) make it qualify for GNG. Those being, the article by the Orlando Sentinel (which if I remember looking for that source correctly, it had been distributed on the AP newswire, meaning it may have even been published in other papers/news outlets elsewhere in the country, but I would need to double check that) and the book Free Speech on America's K-12 and College Campuses (where it was used as a primary case study). On top of that, the fact that the paper has been mentioned, quoted, or had photographs used in multiple other national papers (the biggest I believe are the New York Times and USA Today) seems to make it particularly notable, especially considering the relatively small size of the college it acts as the student paper for. -Navarre0107 (talk) 21:27, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

I wasn't able to find those sources directly, but your sources there do sound like SIGCOV, and I found this on Newspapers.com among other possibilities. Therefore moving to oppose a merge. I'd suggest adding sources directly to the article, ideally with links/page numbers, to help deter future nominations. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 21:34, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.