Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harold and Inge Marcus Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering


 * 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 merge to Penn State College of Engineering. Selectively, and also to other related articles as appropriate.  Sandstein  11:01, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Harold and Inge Marcus Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Every reference here is either by the university itself, or a mere notice about a distinguished graduate or about a donation, We normally do not make articles about university departments unless there are excellent sources to show it's one of the world-leading famous departments in its field. From the material in the article, it's only 8th in the US, Thhe only possible notability is a claim to be the first in its subject, a claim that is disputed on the talk page. Even if true, I don't think we've ever accepted an individual department on such a basis.

The material is promotional and non-encyclopedic. There;'s a paragraph listing the individual research labs in the dept, which is suitable only for it's own web page. There's a paragraph listing the various routine manufacturing techniques that its labs have equipment for. Id hesitate before putting that even in a web page. There's a relatively small number of distinguished alumni listed, which should be in the main article about the College to which it belongs. I'd suggest a redirect, butt here's no purpose in a redirect from one articular department, especially where the title starts the name of the donor, an unlikely search term. I've notified the FA nominator.

I know its a FA--it passed Featured Article in 2006. Featured article candidates/Harold and Inge Marcus Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering. I find that almost unbelievable, even by the standards of the time. There were several comments about being well-referenced, but I think even then we had  standards about needing 3rd party references. I've notified the FA nominator.  DGG ( talk ) 22:39, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep (perhaps unsuprisingly). The article as it stands now may require a FAR, thanks to higher FA standards and recent rewrites, but my understanding is that deletion is usually reserved for non-notable subjects, not low quality articles.  In light of that I'd simply point out that many of the references are (or were) to third parties: The Daily Collegian is an independent (albeit student-run) newspaper, Bezilla's book was published by the university's press but is not a university publication per se (see his preface), and organizations like IIE and CNC Machining are not affiliated with the university.  There are likely more third-party references that could be marshaled in defense of the notability of the department.  Still, you won't hurt my feelings if it's decided that a pared down version of this is more appropriate as a section of the College of Engineering article instead. Spangineerws  (háblame)  02:00, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. No independent third-party sources. DrKay (talk) 18:44, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:13, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. North America1000 04:13, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. North America1000 04:13, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. North America1000 04:13, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Consider selectively merging to Penn State College of Engineering or Pennsylvania State University, both of which presently lack even a mention of this oldest industrial engineering department in the world. A merge in this case is more congruent with Wikipedia's purpose as an encyclopedia compared to overt deletion. North America1000 04:17, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge any suitable material to one of the Penn State articles, though I'm not sure which -- I see this is listed on the Penn State navbox as a department; if that just represents a subdivision of the engineering college then I agree with Northamerica1000 that Penn State College of Engineering is probably the right target. I think the sources, though no doubt reliable in the sense that this information is all accurate, are not sufficiently independent of the subject to establish notability. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 00:01, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep: The status as oldest in the world is notable and is supported by an independent source. Merger into the low quality Penn State College of Engineering article would be detrimental to both articles - to this one because it would probably be dismembered in the process (I assume that's what "selectively merging" means) and to the College of Engineering article because a disproportionate amount of it would then be devoted to only one of its departments. This article received scrutiny as part of the featured articles nomination process (more than it has received here so far) and notability was not considered an issue there. Finally (and perhaps this last is not a valid objection), I really feel that deleting featured articles generally is a step in entirely the wrong direction. Furius (talk) 00:16, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 04:11, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge/Delete - seems to fail WP:BRANCH; most university departments aren't notable in their own right. There are exceptions like Harvard Law School, the Cavendish Laboratory et al, but this doesn't seem to be at that point. Being the first department of its kind is interesting and on the face of it seems take it towards notability, but it doesn't stand scrutiny at all, since many older scientific/industrial training institutions were founded as some kind of vocational or technical college and only became a university (or merged with one) later. To give two British examples, the Royal School of Mines was founded 57 years earlier, and merged with Imperial College London in 1907, both before this department was set up. Mason Science College is more than thirty years older; it merged with the University of Birmingham in the end, seven years before this department was set up. Being "the oldest academic engineering department of a specific kind attached to a specific kind of academic institution" is a very weak claim. You can make anything the first of its kind if you apply enough caveats, and the lack of coverage given to this claim outside of the university's own history speaks volumes. Blythwood (talk) 17:08, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge/Delete I don't see much content or sources that verifies notability by itself. Most information is or would be simply covered by the department's own website and is not necessarily encyclopedic material. It says something when DGG nominates an AFD ;). Reywas92Talk 19:01, 6 August 2016 (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.