Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miskatonic University


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__ to Arkham. Seraphimblade Talk to me 08:02, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Miskatonic University

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Although I own a Miskatonic University t-shirt, sadly, I cannot find a shred of WP:GNG relevance in this article. It's a pure plot summary, referenced to various works of fiction, and my BEFORE is not finding much (or anything) in terms of literary analysis of this fictional entity (just various plot summaries and/or works of fiction mentioning it - although I canno access this, a bit of an oddity, looks like an academic article that appears to treat this entity as real? Some sort of hoax?). WP:ATD suggests a redirect to Arkham might be done (not sure if there is anything here to merge, maybe some referenced parts of the plot summary?). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 13:41, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy,  and Education. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  13:41, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
 * You can ignore that oddity. I just read the introduction to that (special) issue.  It's not meant to be factual.  It is an "imaginative essay". Uncle G (talk) 15:35, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge to Arkham - The Arkham article already covers the university briefly, but some additional information and the reliable sources from this article can be moved over there to beef up its coverage. Neither of the articles are very long by themselves, and as the university and the city it is located in are pretty intrinsically linked together, it makes sense in a WP:NOPAGE kind of way to cover them both in a single article to provide the most context to readers. My thoughts are to create a sub-section at Arkham about the university with the sourced info from this article on its role in the stories, ditch the "Faculty" charts but mention a couple of the notable examples from them in the prose. Rorshacma (talk) 16:00, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge As a complete Wiki newbie and only a part time HPL fan, I can only approach this with the zeal of the woefully ignorant - so here I go. While Miskatonic University is not a primary character, the sheer number of times and places it is referenced in HPL stories, by other authors, and in horror fandom lend it some notability. I agree that this page is somewhat light on unique and notable facts. As a major Arkham institution, moving this content into the City's page is more logical than deletion. I have to disagree about removing the staff lists. That is the kind of flavor and depth that needs to be fleshed out, not snipped. AmishBill (talk) 23:22, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Have a read of User:Uncle G/On notability. Notability isn't about numbers.  It's about depths and provenances of independent documentation by the world at large.  So what one looks for to determine notability is published literary analyses of a Lovecraftian plot element.  After all, it's Lovecraft.  If it's notable, people will have published commentaries/papers/theses/whatnot on it coming out of their ears.  Start with the Lovecraft Lexicon cited as a source right there in the article.  How in-depth is that on this subject?  Uncle G (talk) 00:14, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  18:38, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Redirect/Merge per WP:ATD. WP:BEFORE shows that the subject doesn't have much reception, and does not meet WP:GNG. Shooterwalker (talk) 04:54, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Did you manage to check what the Lovecraft Lexicon says and how much depth it goes into on this subject? (It turns out that there's a Lovecraftian Lexicon as well.  I don't have either, though.) Uncle G (talk) 06:59, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
 * We cannot assume that WP:THEREMAYBESOURCES. Those Lexicons may or may not cover this topic in dpeth. Per WP:V, the responsibility for showing that those sources do this rests on the article's authors or those who want to rescue this. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 12:04, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
 * But, conversely, we don't need to even claim that there may be sources when the article cites them and says that there are; and we can ask the people who are throwing "BEFORE" around whether they, as part of the reasonable search for sources, which is what "BEFORE" is claiming, checked out the source that's handily pointed to by the article and doesn't require searching for stuff at all. Did you look at it?  How in-depth is it?  Uncle G (talk) 14:06, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The responsibility to show that the topic is notalbe, per WP:V, lies with the author/those wanting to keep this. The author cited that source, entry on Miskatonic valley, for etymology, and on the university, for a brief plot summary. They did not cite any analysis. Whether they did not do it on purpose or because the source has nothing else is not relevant. Unless someone can improve this article, we cannot assume that improvement is possible, simply because some sources have been shown to mention this topic. Until someone finds such a source, the topic is not notable. Notability has to be proven, not assumed. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:11, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * No, the responsibility lies with the people going around saying "BEFORE" that they haven't been so boneheaded to as to completely ignore a source cited for them to look at, an entry named "Miskatonic University" in some Lovecraft Lexicon book, in their suppposed "reasonable search for sources beforehand". There's a source there, found, cited, and ready, for the past 17 years.  Putting our fingers in our ears and chanting "until someone finds a source" is clearly trying to pretend that a source isn't there.  The person who wrote the content cited the source, over and over in several edits such as Special:Diff/39062007 back in 2006.  The duty is for us &mdash; you, saying that you've "BEFORE" &mdash; to look at it.  Anything else is evasion.  Uncle G (talk) 09:57, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Nope. Which is why your view on notability is an essay and not the policy... Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 10:09, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * In addition to the lexica that need to be checked out,, which has this, indicates that there are going to be a fair number of other works needed to be read and checked, too. Uncle G (talk) 06:59, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge to Arkham - while I initially expected this to easily be notable, consultations of volumes of forbidden tomes... I mean reliable sources did not come up with more than secretive whispers... I mean trivial mentions of the subject. It is mostly discussed with regards to Arkham, the town in which it resides, such as the entry in The Dictionary of Imaginary Places. The article itself does not demonstrate the idea that such sources exist either. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:44, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. Easily meets WP:GNG. One of the most significant recurring features of Lovecraft's stories and the subsequent Cthulhu Mythos. Plenty of coverage in works about the mythos (not including the stories themselves). -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:00, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Care to tell us which of those works met SIGCOV and go beyond plot summary? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:36, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge to Arkham per nom and others. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:00, 12 November 2023 (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.