Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monash Residential Services (2nd nomination)


 * 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   delete. PhilKnight (talk) 12:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Monash Residential Services
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete, nothing but a dumping ground for vanity and completely unsourced (and unsourceable) original research about student dorms at Monash University, Clayton campus. It was already the subject of an AFD a couple years ago, where at least the decision was made to merge in the articles on the individual halls. Since then, it has remained completely without any references (apart from the MRS and hall official websites) and even with the student vanity garbage removed ("Farrer Hall is the most adventurous hall at Monash. Since the start of 2008 Farrer Hall has not slept, and most residents are on a first name basis with the security guards."), it is still mainly puffed out with unencyclopedic, insignificant information. Without any secondary sources, there's no indication that it has any independent, substantive notability, so there is no basis for it being a stand-alone topic from Monash University, Clayton campus or the main Monash University article. Postdlf (talk) 19:00, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  00:14, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. If the article is bad, deletion is not the answer. Monash is a major university and its Halls of residence (they are not called dorms in Australia) could well be notable on their own, as for example are the Colleges of the older university in Melbourne. The decision to merge them together was sensible, but this combined article should be retained and improved. --Bduke (talk) 00:25, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * "Could" be notable? Now's the time to show that they are, by providing reliable secondary sources that attest to their notability.  If that can't be done (and two years after the prior AFD, there should be no excuse), then this should be deleted and the dorms shouldn't merit more than a mention of their names (if that) in the university's main article.  Postdlf (talk) 01:23, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nothing to indicate any encyclopedic value of the subject, such as architectural of historical significance of the dorms. The article reads like a promotional brochure and it is hard to imagine it being anything else. Fails WP:N. Nsk92 (talk) 00:27, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete No notable content that couldn't be adequately covered within the Monash University, Clayton campus article. Murtoa (talk) 07:42, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Entirely unremarkable and non-notable. Nick Dowling (talk) 08:27, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Per all above. Procedural. Five Years 12:44, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep This was labeled "needs sources" just this month. What's the rush in nominating this based on lack of sources so soon? The sources for this story seem to be included in the article (referenced Webpages.) Notability? Some of these structures have been standing for over 40 years. They are notable in THAT community, certainly, although it fails the "Notoriety on the Internet" standard of some Wikipedians, I guess. Articles on each of these dorm halls would be kind of silly, however, but I see they don't have separate pages anymore, which is fine. I'd point out OTHER articles listing college dorms, but I suppose I'd risk getting the "other crap exists" Deletionist essay thrown at me. As if lists of MIT's dorms are "crap" (not to mention, and I won't, Notre Dame, or Boston University, or Sarah Lawrence, or Harvard.) But I'll skip over that. Finally, nominating an article every month until Wikipedians "get it right" (this was nom. just 4 weeks ago) is abusive. Stub it, fix it, or leave it alone. - Nhprman 02:10, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It was nominated two years ago. Postdlf (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Notability "in THAT community", if that were a criteria, seems to be restricted to the absolute minutiae of the day-to-day happenings of present residents. I appreciate that the current state of the article shouldn't be an absolute guide, but I would hope commentary for Notre Dame or Harvard would be somewhere exceeding Newspapers are delivered directly to the Hall every morning or Each flat is fully furnished to include all the necessities of student life, such as chairs and a table. I have serious doubts about the existence of secondary sources that would lift this article to a sufficient level.  If it were distilled to a strip list of the various halls, then surely that could be a part of the Monash University, Clayton campus article. Murtoa (talk) 02:15, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * You're making comments about the quality of the article, and that's fine, but please feel free to fix it. I'm not opposed to merging this, but the fact that other precedents exist for breaking them out into their own articles does count for something in this discussion. - Nhprman 13:47, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I've taken up your suggestion to fix it. There's not much left, and some is hardly notable, but perhaps a base for improvement, if that's possible. Murtoa (talk) 01:22, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Monash University, Clayton campus can easily incorporate it, to the extent it's verifiable. Postdlf (talk) 01:44, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I urge that what remains be merged into that article and that the AfD be ended. - Nhprman 16:16, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge per above - no independent sources, no evidence of notability is even likely. Bearian&#39;sBooties (talk) 02:29, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - no different from the residential services at a million other schools. The listing of the dorm buildings can be merged into the article on the college in general. --T-rex 19:17, 13 July 2008 (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.