Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Department of Political Studies (Auckland, New Zealand)


 * 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. FT2 (Talk 07:35, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * AFD consensus, also looks like a reasonable policy-based view too.

Department of Political Studies (Auckland, New Zealand)

 * - (View AfD) (View log)

small academic department. not highly notable. no significant reason for separate article. should go bye-bye. some substantial error facts in establishing the notability (it is not on of the largest in Australasia by a long stretch for instance). Much of the information is a violation of copyright. reads largely as an advertorial Fredrickthenotsogreat 02:14, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletions.   -- Midnighttonight ( rendezvous ) 02:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. While I note that there is a merge tag to University of Auckland, not much relevant information could be added without unbalancing the University of Auckland article.  While universities are inherently notable, I do not believe that individual departments within them are, unless there is an exception reason (such as with the Harvard Business School).  While the Department of Political Studies (Auckland, New Zealand) is a reasonably department (although being ranked 3rd out of the 5 political science departments in New Zealand in the PBRF), I see nothing in it which would constitute it requiring a separate article.  Notability assertions include having Robert Chapman as a lecturer, Helen Clark (PM of NZ) as a student, being located in the Faculty of Arts (the faculty being ranked 25th in the world). --Midnighttonight ( rendezvous ) 02:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Harvard Business School isn't even a department, it's a separate graduate school of the university. I agree that any given university department does not merit inclusion.-- Dmz5  *Edits**Talk* 05:21, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment: I vaguely remember hearing something about the (nominal) difference between political science and political studies when I last studied at the department. I think this might have a bearing in the 'largest' claim; not that I, personally, consider that as a good measure of notability. --Dom 11:51, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The assertion of copyvio must be dealt with before Afd can be considered. Remove any information which is a copyvio, then we'll see what's left. Until that is done, Keep. - gadfium 03:08, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Dealt to. The entire history section is pretty much taken out of a book.  Removes a significant amount of content. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 125.237.72.98 (talk) 03:23, 16 January 2007 (UTC).


 * Thanks. I had feared that there might be very little of the article left. As the article is still substantial, and the department has had both notable lecturers and notable students in its history, my opinion is still Keep.- gadfium  05:45, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete or merge, if merging unbalances the article maybe it will encourage people to write fuller paragraphs about the school's other departments? - Dmz5 *Edits**Talk* 05:48, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete after making sure that no general information will be lost in it's deletion (there doesn't seem to be much). Radagast83 06:21, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, don't see any notability in university departments, nothing will be lost anyway. Terence Ong 12:25, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge to University of Auckland. -- Whpq 13:43, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge to University of Auckland, although it would need to be reduced somewhat so as to not dominate the University's entry. JCO312 21:37, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Cleanup and Merge cleanup in accordance with WP:SPAM, then merge with University of Auckland per above users. Anthony cfc  [ T &bull; C] 21:52, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Merge per JCO312.  Insane  phantom   (my Editor Review)  05:47, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I can't really see the point in merging it, since it will significantly alter the university page and leave it unbalanced. Unless someone wants to create info on all the programmes at Auckland Uni, I suggest you delete this article instead of merge it into another. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.237.72.98 (talk • contribs)


 * Because the department has had a major influence on the modern course of NZ politics, and because a few of its current lecturers are major figures in their own right, the page should stay. People can edit as they please, but the impact on of the department on contemporary NZ is felt throughout the policy spectrum. Incidentally, it ranked 1st of 5 in NZ in the PBRF system-the coment that it was 3rd smacks of jealous misinformation by one of the lower-ranked departments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.216.146.240 (talk • contribs)
 * Have you read the PBRF report?  Table A-34.  It clearly indicates that Auckland University is third overall in the PBRF for Political Science, International Relations and Public Policy with a score of 4.0 (Victoria University of Wellington is at 4.7, and University of Canterbury at 4.3).  Learn to fact check.
 * Furthermore, do you have any evidence that the department has had a substantial impact on the course of NZ politics, or that any of the lecturers are major figures? --125.237.72.98 22:42, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Addhoc 18:20, 22 January 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.

This really smacks of jealousy. Cantebury ranked higher than Auckland in Political Studies? Are you serious? Is there anyone at Cantebury in Politics that matters? Vic can make some claims, but the PBRF scores in no way reflect the true weight of Auckland in national political life. Beside the alumni, people like Jack Vowles, Raymond Miller, Yongjin Zhang, Paul Buchanan, Helena Catt, Andrew Sharp, Barry Gustafson, Peter Aimer, all current or recent staff, are certainly major academic figures in NZ political life. Deleting the page or merging into the Auckland general page might be advisable, but the grounds advocated by the one commentator show a clear prejudice against the department. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.216.146.240 (talk • contribs)