Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Center for Urban Research and Learning


 * 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 keep. Ad Orientem (talk) 02:30, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Center for Urban Research and Learning

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG The Banner talk 17:49, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America1000 21:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. North America1000 21:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. North America1000 21:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * keep I've added some sources. Although they are not independent since the author is affiliated with CURL, they were published by third parties and have a high impact factor. A search of Google scholar turn up hundreds of papers  A search of Google news  and newspapers.com  shows that this institutions research is often cited by the popular press. In summary, I think that that although CURL fails WP:GNG due to source independence issues, it passes WP:NORG due to the continuing coverage of its research.  — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 13:21, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
 * And what is the value of these links? Just mentioning the name but not writing about the institute? The Banner talk 12:40, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The editor  whose username is Z0  08:48, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep - Passes WP:NORG. I would add that the preamble to WP:GNG states "though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply." This article provides useful information on a significant organisation and there is no way that WP would be improved by its deletion. A good dose of common sense should be applied. Just Chilling (talk) 23:17, 24 June 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.</b> 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.