Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of faculty members of the Courtauld Institute


 * 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 Courtauld Institute of Art. (non-admin closure) ~ Aseleste  (t, e &#124; c, l) 06:40, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

List of faculty members of the Courtauld Institute

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Should Wikipedia really maintain a list of something as fluid as the faculty of this institute? Page hasn't been updated since its inception eight years ago. Compare List of alumni of the Courtauld Institute of Art which seems much more stable and also more notable (also naming inconsistency). Regards CapnZapp (talk) 07:56, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. CapnZapp (talk) 07:56, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:01, 4 April 2021 (UTC)


 * If the institute is notable and so are the faculty, then yes. And we wouldn’t want to just list current faculty, but also include former notable faculty and the list can annotate that status if verifiable. This list could probably be merged back to the parent article as it’s short, however. postdlf (talk) 16:46, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: As the nom, a result of merge would be acceptable (once this page is deleted we can discuss the notability of the staff over at Talk:Courtauld Institute of Art). Cheers CapnZapp (talk) 09:21, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * If the page is merged it would be redirected there, not deleted. postdlf (talk) 17:28, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Fair enuff, User:Postdlf. CapnZapp (talk) 21:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete an institution being notable does not in any way, shape or form mean the faculty are notable. If it did we would need complete faculty lists for every high school we have an article on. Down this path lies madness.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:01, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Your comment is responding to a strawman that no one has asserted, and that's not what this list is. postdlf (talk) 17:28, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Actually, no, I wouldn't mind deleting the list. Included in the list of reasons I would agree with are that it isn't getting timely updates, that we don't need a separate article, and that the faculty might not be notable in its own right. (But as I have already said, I'm okay with a merge outcome too, since we can always discuss the notability issue separately afterwards, so I do not intend to start an argument here.) Regards, CapnZapp (talk) 21:26, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * This list only includes faculty who are notable, every entry is bluelinked. And that's all we'd normally mention in the parent article unless we had an informational reason to mention anyone nonnotable (i.e., they were significant in the school's history or public perception in some way even if they did not merit their own article); we would not attempt to list all faculty. So that's why JPL's comment about high school faculty lists is completely off base, and I don't see how there's any notability issue to discuss. I also don't get what you mean by "timely updates", as we would not be trying to give a directory of just who is currently working there, rather a historic record of anyone notable who ever had regardless of if they still are. postdlf (talk) 15:38, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * We can discuss the difference between a list being notable and individual items being notable later. Cheers CapnZapp (talk) 19:57, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Not relevant here. First, this page isn't about a list, the list is merely the method of presenting information/indexing articles, just as is Category:Academics of the Courtauld Institute of Art, which appears to be the corresponding category (and the contents of which suggest this list could be expanded by quite a bit). See WP:CLN and WP:LISTPURP. And "list notability" (whatever you mean by that) is doubly irrelevant if it is merged to just a subsection in the parent article, but if we do have enough notable entries then it's justifiable to keep as a standalone WP:SPLIT even apart from its value as an index of articles. It's then a clear keep or merge. postdlf (talk) 20:27, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The fact I've said three times this isn't the right place for the notability discussion means I agree with you. List articles are rarely about a list? This is AfD, not CfD. I'm unsure what you mean by a "standalone SPLIT". Whether this list has any value is debatable, yes. Thank you for finalizing your not-votes. Regards, CapnZapp (talk) 20:43, 14 April 2021 (UTC)


 * merge with Courtauld Institute of Art, these are notable but should not be in their own article. --hroest 13:56, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: See comment to postdlf above CapnZapp (talk) 09:21, 7 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Merge to the institution page. Riteboke (talk) 07:18, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge to Courtauld Institute of Art as others have suggested for the reasons advanced above. We don't need a standalone page on this and it seems less likely to be maintained when it's separate from the institute's page. DocFreeman24 (talk) 06:02, 15 April 2021 (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.