Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Institute for Quantitative Social Science


 * 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 speedily deleted  G12 by RHaworth (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://www.iq.harvard.edu/book/mission). Housekeeping closure. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 05:39, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Institute for Quantitative Social Science

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

unreferenced since feb 2013. does not appear to pass WP:ORG or WP:NONPROFIT Gaijin42 (talk) 15:38, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  15:44, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  15:44, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  15:45, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 17:13, 26 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e deckertalk 05:40, 2 April 2014 (UTC)




 * Keep. The 2014 Political Science journal article by Gary King, here suffices for me as pretty good documentation.  That article is cited by 5 others apparently already.  Google search brings up plenty under the current name of the center alone.  It has existed for a longer time under the former name of the center.  There is plenty about this;  notability is clear. -- do  ncr  am  12:18, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Two notes on that source. 1) its by gary king, the director of the IQSS surely fails the "independent" test. 2) Gary king is the author of the article, which surely fails WP:COI as well (although Gary certainly has a very respectable history on wiki otherwise).Gaijin42 (talk) 19:33, 3 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. For the reason given above (the journal article by Gary king), I believe that this wikipedia entry should not be deleted. User talk:Ctfn 22:54 02 April 2014 (BST). — Preceding undated comment added 21:54, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. I have read the article and I tend to agree with doncram. The institute seems to be notable for me. User:BenoitHoog 12:18, 2 April 2014 (GMT+1)

Gaijin42 (talk) 19:17, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete. Much of the article is copied directly from the sources and thus a copyright violation. Also, the article contains no references to independent sources to demonstrate notability. --Hirolovesswords (talk) 19:08, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
 * nominator speedy delete copyright violation
 * "director" section copyright violation source : http://gking.harvard.edu/biocv
 * "what does social science mean" copyvio source : http://www.iq.harvard.edu/book/mission
 * "centers" http://www.primidi.com/institute_for_quantitative_social_science/centers_at_iqss
 * 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.