Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Degree Programs at Ohio Wesleyan University


 * 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   no consensus. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  01:12, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Degree Programs at Ohio Wesleyan University

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Anything encyclopedic here should be in the main article for the school; anything else violates WP:NOTDIRECTORY. THF (talk) 03:14, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Yeah, unless there is something noteworthy about the programs offered, which is doubtful, this is basically just a directory of departments and not an encyclopedia article. Indrian (talk) 03:17, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete directory, thoroughly unencyclopedic. JJL (talk) 03:21, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, and then consider whether to Merge back. The list of majors is considered appropriate content in the article on a college--and whether to list it separately is a decision on style. It was previously split, and afd is not for considering the merits of such editing decisions.  I am not sure whether it should be separate, but this is not the place to discuss it.   DGG (talk) 03:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Can you show me a guideline or something to prove that "a list of majors is considered appropriate content" ? If you can I will second your opinion. Nerfari (talk) 22:57, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as per Indrian. RP459 (talk) 04:08, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  —Cunard (talk) 04:39, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Ohio_Wesleyan_University. Per WP:UNIGUIDE academic departments are generally not considered notable enough for their own articles; presumably this extends to listings of degree programs, therefore this AfD should not endorse keeping the article as a stand-alone.  The content is appropriate for inclusion in the parent article, and ordinarily I would endorse a merge, but I share DGG's opinion that we should leave that move to the article talk page, considering that the material was split out per a recommendation made during a Featured Article review.  Redirecting asserts that the material is not notable enough for its own stand-alone article, while keeping the content intact under the redirect in case a consensus forms to merge it into the parent article.  Baileypalblue (talk) 05:10, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I have started a discussion on the parent article talk page. Baileypalblue (talk) 05:21, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Per WP:LIST. --Mr Accountable (talk) 15:41, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, too bad its not a list so that really does not apply. Indrian (talk) 21:36, 11 March 2009 (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.