Deletion of Metallurgical education (2nd nomination)

Comment: there is something very strange happening here. A whole raft of spurious links has appeared to the page under discussion created by Philly jawn. Some of these are through a strange new redirect page that appears to have been constructed to bamboozle like  :Metallurgic engineering (there are more), others are a tranche of ''See also'' entries. If I were not assuming good faith I would suggest that this is a  set of edits. Creating imperfect links and weird redirects is not the way to save this article. Creating  citations for ''Metallurgical education'', by which I do not mean a load of links to university and college prospectuses, is the way to save it. When and it of is verifiably notable as a separate topic then it can, if there is sufficient material to warrant it, have its own article
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point (WP:POINT||WP:RS)

Comment: It's not policy, but  offers some really good advice - this article must stand on its own merits to be kept. Are there reliable sources that discuss Metallurgical education as a field of study? Is there prominent literature in the field? The other, related articles might bear mention, but if the only argument is that this should exist because those articles exist, you don't really have an argument. May I also suggest that we all |assume good faith here? We have the AFD process specifically to discuss the merits of the article in question, so bringing it here is very much ''not'' an abuse of process, and accusing other editors of such abuse is right out. Thanks
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS||WP:AGF)

Comment: The topic and title are valid, but the current content is too far from decent WP standarts. There are numerous problems in the first part (factual, grammar, POV, no refs - I could list a half page of specific mistakes), starting from the lead, and I would oppose the second part per  - there is no way to keep that list comprehensive and updated. The article can be easily saved by rewriting, but given its stale history, with no attempts to fix problems pointed out before, '''delete'''. Some quick catches, apart from obvious grammar mistakes: "study .. of skills"; destructive and non-destructive testing is not part of metallurgy, but stands above it; "steels including iron-carbon alloys"; "Metallurgical chemistry .. is a useful study .. for chemistry students" (oh yeah!); "Metallurgical chemistry course provides a basic knowledge of metallurgical chemistry; and managers or businesses" (Ugh); "However, cutting-edge applications in this field metallurgy are developing super conductors and other atomically restructured metals" (Ugh
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTDIRECTORY)

Comment: Wikipedia does not require ''useful articles''. It requires |notable articles whose notability is |verifiable. This is not notable. Doubtless it could be made more ''useful'', but that is not the point
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTABILITY||WP:VERIFIABILITY)