Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/6.001 (MIT)


 * 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 11:36, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

6.001 (MIT)
Individual class; not notable Gerrit CUTEDH 14:25, 1 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete per nomination. - Gerrit CUTEDH 14:25, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Please let us not start down this road. -R. fiend 17:07, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Crikey! --fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 17:22, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: I think "Individual class; not notable" is a statement of fact followed by an assumption; the assumption might be a natural one but I think it may be mistaken in this case.  6.001 is not just a class but a particular course design and as the article mentions, the design of this specific course has been actually copied by other universities.  I think voters should be careful to make sure they are assessing the notability of this core class at this highly famous and influential university, and not the notability of a generic class at a generic university. -- Antaeus Feldspar 20:44, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable. Carioca 21:22, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: this article has existed for more than three years. Gerrit CUTEDH 21:55, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Not the perfect article, but I assure other editors that encyclopedic writing can be done about this subject.  As far as "notability" is concerned, surely this is one of the most "notable" undergraduate computer science classes in the world.  Having said that, I wouldn't like to see WP start mirroring course catalogues from every university either... Jkelly 22:13, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete ugh (i.e. nn). Dottore So 22:28, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom. If someone wants to write an encyclopedic article on a particular teaching style in computer science, with references and explanation of why it is notable, fine, but that is by no means this. MCB 22:48, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Article asserts notability, and such is demonstrated. Come on; it's a notorious elementary programming class at MIT.  Sounds notable. And the article doesn't mirror the course catalogue.  Like many things at MIT, the class seems to have developed its own folklore. - Sensor 00:25, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 * If this is worthy of inclusion, it seems to me it is only because it has been copied by other universities. If that's the case, surely it goes by another name? I've taken a bunch of classes in my day, but not one did I ever call "HIST 377" or anything. I'm still leaning going for delete, but if someone can offer a convincing move, and perhaps some tidying, I may reconsider. -R. fiend 14:37, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment At MIT numbers are used for everything. "History" is called "21H".  Jkelly 23:53, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 * But surely if it has been copied by other colleges (it's ownly potential claim of notability, as far as I can tell), they didn't keep this title. And (not that I know much about it) I have a hard time believing classes at MIT only go by numbers. When a father asks his son what classes he's taking, does he get the response "7.989, 45.997, 3.141592, and 77.771." Would that mean anything to anyone? -R. fiend 05:14, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's appropriate to ask "would the father of a student know what 6.001 is?" I don't think my father knows what Elias omega coding is but that doesn't mean it isn't notable among people who are versed in that field.  In the same vein, I'm afraid I don't see why the fact that those people who know it know it by the number seems to be classed as an argument for its non-notability; is RU 486 non-notable because its designation is just letters and numbers? -- Antaeus Feldspar 17:44, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * The question isn't whether the father would know what it meant, but what is a class actually called beyond a number designation. Surely when anyone discusses a class, they use some sort of descriptive words. Even the universal "101" has something describing what exactly it is you'll be studying at an introductory level. Other schools that teach this class must use a different title. Whenever I looked through a course catalog at any of the colleges I've taken classes at, I looked at the titles of classes, not just a bunch of numbers, because those meant nothing, and mean nothing without anoither context. -R. fiend 18:04, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete There are many classes at many prestigious schools (including my alma mater, Harvard College) which are notable on campus, and have legitimate lore associated with them at their schools. The best fate for such classes is a merge to the school, if they are really very well-known.  Having lived in Cambridge, Mass., I'm not sure is. Xoloz 22:24, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. University courses are not notable. -- Necrothesp 02:30, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete I went to MIT; I know lots of people who went through 6.001; I don't know a reason why it needs to be here. Anville 17:47, 5 November 2005 (UTC)


 * 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.