Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Free and open-source course Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Free_and_open-source_course

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 delete. Spartaz ^Humbug! 17:27, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Free and open-source course

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

Not notable. Tyros1972 Talk 18:29, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Agree with nominator, not notable. UnrepentantTaco (talk) 18:57, 15 June 2013 (UTC) [Edit reverted as per WP:BE and [1]. Unscintillating (talk) 02:24, 24 June 2013 (UTC)][reply]

Note: User has been indef blocked as a sockpuppet (link). czar · · 20:30, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:18, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:19, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wait It might be notable. It was tagged for deletion too soon after being started, while there was still an underconstruction sign on it. If it appears there might be some possibilities, I think it best to wait a week or so, but certainly at least a few days. DGG ( talk ) 01:31, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, perhaps with different title. Apparently this is a notable concept, even if not always called by this exact name. Here are just a few of many reliable sources I found.
- Namestovski, Zolt; Marta Takacs; Branka Arsovic (2012). "Supporting traditional educational process with e-learning tools" (PDF): 461–464. doi:10.1109/SISY.2012.6339565. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
- Heussner, Ki mae (12 September 2012). "Google gets into online learning with open-source Course Builder software". GigaOM.
- Marcus, Jon (23 January 2012). "Free courses may shake universities' monopoly on credit". Hechinger Report.
- Barseghian, Tina (28 November 2011). "What Colleges Must Do to Stay Relevant". MindShift.
- Olster, Scott (18 March 2013). "Startups are about to blow up the textbook - Fortune Tech". CNN.

And there are even more articles listed at http://ocw.mit.edu/about/media-coverage/ -- Brainy J (previously Atlantima) ~✿~ (talk) 14:45, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar · · 20:30, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete. We already have the article Massive open online course, and most of the references above seem to refer to the subject of that article. It's not clear that this is a notable variation in any way, given the almost total lack of article content. I get no hits on the acronym FLOSC, nor do any of the references provided refer to it. I get hits for the phrase "free and open source course," but they all refer to "free and open source course management software" such as Moodle (i.e. it's the software that's free, not the course). Some of the references above refer to that, but that's not the topic of this article. This article seems to have begun as a misunderstanding of the topic, and the author seems to have left Wikipedia. There is nothing in the article worth saving. Let it go. -- 202.124.74.3 (talk) 13:07, 29 June 2013 (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.