Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Engineering Ivies


 * 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 of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 01:29, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Engineering Ivies
I just added this for delete because there essentially no hits for the term. —BenFrantzDale 17:14, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

I say Keep. It may be very recent, so Google wouldn't find it yet. Give a chance for the bots to crawl through the blogs. Xuanwu 22:07, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Can you comment on this page relating to the rule of avoiding neologisms? —BenFrantzDale 05:57, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I did my own Google search and it came back with this: Economic Times article and ASEE Prism article. Apparently the phrase "Engineering Ivy League" (which leads to "Engineering Ivies") is legitimate. As for whether this article accurately portrays what it is another matter that can be settled through content updates. But it does not seem to qualify as a neologism. Xuanwu 08:43, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Uhhh how does even "Engineering Ivy League" not qualify? 54 results on Google.  Used in 2 articles.  Not really defined anywhere that I can find, let alone in a dictionary of phrases or something similar.  Seems like a neologism to me (and to Avoid neologisms for whatever that's worth)..  --W.marsh 15:30, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * The references Xuanwu cites are mostly to "Engineering Ivy Leagues" in India, Japan, China, not in the U. S. Dpbsmith (talk) 16:33, 13 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete Too much a neologism, and too hard to keep NPOV. Anville 11:05, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * This afd nomination was orphaned. Listing now. &mdash;Crypticbot (operator) 13:03, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. per my proposal at Ivies. Comments follow. Dpbsmith (talk) 16:33, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Total nonsense and all but unverifiable. "Engineering Ivy League" gets a very few Google hits referring to groups of universities in Japan (apparently University of Tokyo, Kyoto University, Kyushu University, and Hokkaido University?), and India (apparently to "the six Indian Institutes of Technology and other top tech campuses,"). China is hoping to develop an "engineering Ivy League" . In connection with Japan and China, there's little Google evidence that is is anything more than a personal coinage of Lucille Craft of ASEE, who wrote both articles. If there were enough good, well-sourced, verifiable information on the Indian, Chinese and Japanese "engineering Ivy Leagues" to write a stub, I'd do so, and recommend that this article become a redirect to that, but I don't think there is.


 * As to the U.S., the phrase is not used, except as a nonspecific adjective for "very good school." This article is just academic boosterism, a pretext for listing what someone thinks are the best engineering schools.


 * The phrase "Engineering Ivies" could just as well refer to Cornell and Princeton, two Ivy League schools noted for exceptional engineering schools. (Harvard almost deliberately encouraged people not to think of it as an engineering school by refusing to use the word "Engineering" in connection with their excellent Division of Applied Science until very recently, but methinks I recall some rather stellar work done there in the development of computers...)
 * I hate using U. S. News as an authority, but will nevertheless point out that schools listed don't even bear a good relationship to the U. S. News rankings of engineering schools, in which the real ivies Cornell, Princeton, and Harvard, all outrank both Virginia Tech and RPI, while Stanford and Berkeley outrank Georgia Tech. Dpbsmith (talk) 16:33, 13 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. They also left off Columbia University's School of Engineering and Applied Science, whose students play alongside Columbia College athletes on intermural teams.  Non-notable neologism, inaccurate and confusing. Durova 18:48, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Either I'm guilty of WP:BEANS or someone was independently executing on a bad idea at the same time I was explaining here why it is bad. Look. We should not have an article about "Engineering Ivies" in the U. S. unless someone can find a good, verifiable source that defines that the phrase means and gives a reasonably objective list of what schools qualify. Maybe someone can find something that says being a member of the Ivy League disqualifies a school from being an Engineering Ivy, but I'd really like to see a source for that. As for Japan and China, one columnist in ASEE is not a sufficient indication that the term is in widespread use. Dpbsmith (talk) 16:40, 13 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. Unavoidably POV. Superm401 | Talk 19:13, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. WP:POINT.  User:Zoe|(talk) 23:13, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Neologism. 140.247.99.205 17:51, 16 November 2005 (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.