Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Department of Geography University of Canterbury


 * 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 delete - not notable. Krakatoa Katie  20:42, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Department of Geography University of Canterbury

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

non notable university department; no claim of notability that I can see. I will also nominate one other department article from this university. Brianyoumans 02:34, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * The article Department of Chemical and Process Engineering, University of Canterbury is included in this AFD. Brianyoumans 02:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge both per nom. CRGreathouse (t | c) 02:59, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge both. Except in rare cases, it's hard to see notability for an individual department. --Dhartung | Talk 11:52, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep This article is not complete and if you keep an eys on it over the next couple of days there will be a number of notable things about the department which will show that this page is worth storing. For example one of the Professors has just received NZ's highest award for contributions to Geography - this is a big deal and will be one of many things that will appear shortly on this page. Watch this space!  Chopperxs 23:27, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I think that might mean that the professor deserves an article - possibly - but not the department (or not based solely on that, anyways.) I would say that an academic department could be notable if it was the first such department worldwide, or perhaps in a large country; if it had been in the news due to controversy (say, the African-American Studies program at Harvard); or if it had been a special center for significant research, the home of a number of prominent scholars. Otherwise... it's a university department. There are bound to be a few good professors in every department, but that doesn't make the department itself interesting enough, imho, to deserve an article. Brianyoumans 22:29, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm pleased that you have, in your description above, listed the main reason why you should remove your objection to this page. The Department of Geography at the University of Canterbury was the first Department of Geography in NZ formed in 1937 by George Jobberns, who was responsible for attracting a young Kenneth Coumberland to NZ in 1938. This is described in the extract from Cumberland's memoir published in the NZ Geographer in April 2007. I am about to add this and other notable facts about the department so I assume you will now support the saving of this page.Chopperxs 23:27, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * If I considered NZ a large country, I might. If you told me it was the first such department in the Asia-Pacific region, that would be more impressive. Brianyoumans 22:44, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * what country are you from? Try to remember this is an international wikipedia and is not just for people in "big countries". What might not be notable for you in your "big country" may be notable for those of us in "small countries" like NZ. Chopperxs 23:27, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I am (of course) an American. NZ has a smaller population than the American state of Wisconsin. Would it be an impressive claim to say "this was the first geography department in Wisconsin"? I don't think so. But really, my objection is not that this article related to NZ, it is that in general, I don't believe academic departments are notable. By my criteria above, I would imagine that very few departments would have articles, in the US or elsewhere. Brianyoumans 23:31, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge both - and I say that as a New Zealander. The vast majority of university departments are not worth separate articles, even those which are the first of their type in the country. Stand-alone departments, such as medical schools, may be worthy of separate articles, but departments such as these are not. Grutness...wha?  00:43, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I find it interesting that you say no stand alone departments should have a page then you say medical departments should - what is you reasoning behind why a medical department is more important then a Geography department It is also worth noting that the GeoHealth laboratory, a UC geography research centre as referred to in the Department of Geography page is a medical research centre and is part of the Geography Department. Does this mean we fit your criteria for inclusion as we have a medical component? Chopperxs 01:08, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I find it interesting that you completely misread what I said. I said that stand-alone departments are often worth articles. The UC Geography department is not a stand-alone department, however, but has exactly the same administration as other departments at the university. I did not say that medical departments should - I said that medical schools should - these are sections of universities which have their own separate administration, largely autonomous from the rest of the university structure. And I also only used those as an example in that they are often the best-known type of semi-autonomous sections of universities. Let's face it, this is simply a department - it's not even a faculty, let alone a semi-autonomous school. Grutness...wha?  04:00, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Keep The Department of Geography @ University of Canterbury is one of the only true GEOGRAPHY Departments left in the world - it is one of the only 2 Departments of Geography in Australasia (corrected thanks to comment below). Most others have been split (with physical geographers going into Geosciences or Earth Science, and human geographers going into planning or sociology type schools) or the geographers have been merged into bigger schools (with planning, architecture, geology, environmental science etc). Who cares? Why is this significant? Due to its Department structure, UC GEOG is able to generate valuable insight into many geographic issues today via physical and human geographers working together to critique and contribute to each others' work. This allows science to inform culture and culture to inform science in a way that rarely happens in our siloised research society today.Cerpha 02:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC) — User:Cerpha (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * I'm sure they'd be interested to hear all that at the University of Otago's Geography Department - it's only 300 kilometres down the road from UC. And though it likes to think it's in another country, Auckland University has a Geography Department too - neither is outside new Zealand, let alone outside Australasia. Either you should check you facts or be aware that people here can easily check them for you. Grutness...wha?  04:00, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * As your link to Auckland university shows this is not a department and is as Cerpha suggests a merged school of Geography, Geology and Environmental Science (SGGES). I will let Cerpha defend their statement with regard to the University of Otago.Chopperxs 04:29, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

There seems to be some conflict of views here. Either a first department in a country is deemed good enough or it isn't. I don't think the size of the country or whether it is a 'medical school' is relevant. I personally think if it is the first Geography Dept in the country then it is significant and should be included. Also how do we define "in the news due to controversy" or arguably more controversially in academic circles "a special center for significant research" or "the home of a number of prominent scholars". It strikes me that this page is under construction, and we should wait till it is complete before having it deleted. Siphd 02:28, 16 October 2007 (UTC) — User:Siphd (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * I suppose it should be noted that the two preceding comments are the first and only edits by each account. Brianyoumans 02:45, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Isn't it good to see more people getting involved Siphd 03:06, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * This is also my first go at wikipedia - does that make my opinions worth less than yours? I think its quite good that new people are getting involved. The fact that they are choosing to make their first comments in this discussion makes me think even more that this page is worth keeping. I look forward to seeing what else will be said.Chopperxs 03:21, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it's good that new people are involved, and no, it doesn't matter whether you've edited 10 or 10,000 articles. However, it is worth noting that, as newcomers, you may have a little less knowledge of what qualifies as a notable subject for a separate article. Also - with regard to Siphd and Cerpha's edits - there is usually severe suspicion when a new editor's first edits are to a process page; most Wikipedians take a considerable time before they find their way around Wikipedia enough to know that such pages even exist - let alone have the knowledge of Wikipedia's protocols and standards well enough to be able to make pertinent comments on such a page. Grutness...wha?  04:00, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * News travels fast in "little countries" and with 100s of Geography students at UC and 17000 odd students in the University word is bound to get out and students are very good at helping each other in the technicalities of such sites. I myself as mentioned am new to Wikipedia (I have spent around 2 hours in wikipedia in total) and I seem to have figured most things out.  I think you are over complicating wikipedia a bit. It is a tool for the masses and is designed with that in mind.Chopperxs 04:12, 16 October 2007 (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.