Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murdoch Guild


 * 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 Murdoch University. Juliancolton (talk) 01:55, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Murdoch Guild

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Declined speedy; as the navigation box demonstrates, what we do with these varies widely. My personal view is that all principal student organizations of major universities are notable. but that's only my own view for what it's worth. This particular one therefore needs a group decision. (as for as anyone wants to vote count, my view this nomination should be a keep, not a delete. I send it here myself to simplify matters, since someone else surely will.   DGG ( talk ) 18:29, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak merge to Murdoch University. I agree that the principal student organisations of a university are notable elements of the school, and basic information about them belongs in the article about the university.  If the organisation is particularly active and engages in activities that draw coverage in reliable sources, it may editorially make sense to expand the content in a sub-article, to give extra space for sourced material. However, in the case of the current Murdoch Guild article, the extra space seems to be serving only the purpose of enabling all the members of the Guild Council to get their names into Wikipedia.  And the article currently lacks any sources or indicia that suggest that the Guild is notable independent from the school.  (Google News does turn up a couple of stories about some 2008 friction between the guild and the administration but I'd be inclined to think this would be well enough treated in the university article, if at all.) So I would be inclined to support merging this back into the main article for the school, without prejudice to restoring a separate article if such becomes useful in future.--Arxiloxos (talk) 20:33, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  --  Bduke    (Discussion)  08:31, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge sourced and relevant content to Murdoch University. Not sure where the independent sources will come from for most of the material in the article. If the idea of "deemed notability" for these organisations as pushed by the nominator is accepted it will lead to a run of articles like this one that fail to meet the core project policy of WP:V. -- Mattinbgn\talk 08:55, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  —• Gene93k (talk) 22:42, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:43, 26 May 2010 (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.