Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dean of University of British Columbia Faculty of Law


 * 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   redirect to University of British Columbia Faculty of Law. There is a clear consensus to merge/redirect. Since all of the referenced, relevant content already appears to be at the target, a redirect suffices. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:21, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Dean of University of British Columbia Faculty of Law

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Deletion per WP:GNG and WP:Overcategorization. I feel a category for the Dean of a Law university has no place on Wikipedia. Peripherally, I also feel this article violates WP:IINFO and WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Shashwat986 &rarr; talk 19:25, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:01, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:01, 22 September 2012 (UTC)


 * This isn't a category, so WP:OCAT does not apply. The rest of your nom is just a bunch of WP:VAGUEWAVEs with no explanation or justification other than ipse dixit. The information is already at University of British Columbia Faculty of Law, however, making this list duplicative. The list is also too short to justify a WP:SPLIT due to WP:SIZE concerns, so just redirect or delete. postdlf (talk) 02:30, 22 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Well if you guys think that it should be deleted, then you should also delete Dean of Harvard Law School for the exact same reasons. I created the Dean of University of British Columbia Faculty of Law based on that page. I personally think it should remain, but I'm tired and not really in the mood to argue. CanadaRed (talk) 09:13, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the effort, and it wasn't a bad idea. However, the Harvard Law School article is longer without the dean's list included, its dean list is nearly twice as long and consists entirely of individuals that merit articles, and the position of Harvard Law School Dean is a much more prominent one. So the need for either school to have a separate list is not comparable. What's the problem with just including the list of deans in the main University of British Columbia Faculty of Law article? You could develop that bare list into a table there just as easily, and if you can find sources supporting their individual notability, make articles for each of the deans too. postdlf (talk) 17:48, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the appreciation. I do agree with you that there is work to be done on the UBC Dean List, and it certainly is a work in progress. I personally haven't had a chance to put more work into it yet, but I plan to when I have a bit more free time. I do have an issue with the comparison between Harvard and UBC though. First, Harvard is not the most prominent law school in the US. I believe both Yale and Stanford are ranked higher. Second, you're comparing schools in two different countries and two different legal systems. They're both common law, but there are many differences between Canadian and US law. It's like comparing apples and oranges. Canadian lawyers and judges are Canadian, not American. Having a law degree from Harvard doesn't mean anything as far as the Canadian Law Societies are concerned. A graduate of Harvard would have as much difficulty being called to the bar in Canada as a graduate of the lowest ranked American law school. Basically the prominence of an American law school is irrelevant in Canada. In Canada, the three most prominent universities are UofT, UBC, and McGill. As I said earlier, I believe both articles should remain. CanadaRed (talk) 21:31, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The differences between Canadian law and American law are completely irrelevant; what is relevant is that Harvard Law Deans are demonstrably notable individually and as a group and UBC Law Deans might not be. Just because we have one standalone list of law school deans does not mean every law school merits them; we reject that as an WP:OTHERSTUFF argument. But I think the key point, which you have not addressed, is that the Harvard dean list and article are too long to be combined, while the UBC list is short enough to be included in the main school article, and indeed is included there at present though without the table formatting the standalone list has. So per WP:SPINOUT and WP:SPLIT, there is no reason to maintain it as a separate list instead of just developing it within the school's article. postdlf (talk) 21:53, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
 * In reply to Postdlf: The difference between Canadian law and American law is exactly why Harvard's law Dean would not be a very notable for the Canadian legal field. I do admit that having "Harvard" in any title may to some degree have a "wow" factor for some people. That being said, American law is different than Canadian law. Because of this simple reason, I would argue that unlike most other academic fields, much of the work and scholarship that comes from Harvard Law would be irrelevant to Canadians. For this reason, UofT, UBC, McGill, and basically any other Canadian law school would be more relevant to Canadians (especially those in the legal field). American institutions are not the only institutions that matter.CanadaRed (talk) 22:15, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't understand what any of that has to do with this AFD; this is not Canadian Wikipedia. postdlf (talk) 22:32, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I never suggested that this is Canadian Wikipedia. Wikipedia has articles on Canadian institutions and institutions from many other countries. As I said before, you can't just ignore these other institutions and place all the importance on American institutions. CanadaRed (talk) 08:36, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Again, not relevant and not what's going on here. This topic needs to stand on its own; a Canadian law school does not get its own dean's list just because an American law school does, particularly not when the lists differ in terms of length relative to the parent article from which they were split and the notability of the entries. So none of what you have said is in any way responsive to the arguments as to why this list should be redirected or deleted, and you seem to be confused about what "notability" means here. You haven't even acknowledged the fact that this duplicates a section that is already in the law school article, so you're a long way off from explaining why this needs to be separate. postdlf (talk) 11:25, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect per WP:OUTCOMES, since at least some of the information is useful; but to label the office itself as notable is a stretch. Bearian (talk) 16:43, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep good list. Short?  yes.  Notable?  Definitely.  Clean, easy-to-read, provides more details and information than a category could.  The "Canada vs. Harvard" arguments are irrelevant.  Original deletion argument calls this a category, but it is actually a list article.--Paul McDonald (talk) 13:33, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge to University of British Columbia Faculty of Law. This would be best included in the main school article - the list is short, and the school article is not overly long. I think a split would be possible in the future if the section becomes long enough, and if it is sourced to reliable sources that could help prove the notability of the position itself. For now, though, I think a merge would be most expedient. — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 06:44, 29 September 2012 (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.