Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New Ivies


 * 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. Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 23:23, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

New Ivies
non-notability, neologism, just another list ExplorerCDT 06:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Rationale for nomination: This is a term that appeared in an article in Newsweek magazine LAST WEEK. I don't believe it has been around suffienciently long enough to be inherently notable. It is pretty much a marketing gimmick Newsweek does to sell magazines, so this time, instead of calling the article "Hottest Schools" like they usually do, they named it "New Ivies." Thus, it's technically a neologism This is not a group of schools like the Ivy League, the Colonial colleges that have been around for a long time and as such the term and their association becomes notable. This is a term invented last week, and aside from one magazine article (reported also by their coverage partner MSNBC), it has no longevity backing it up. If this were an article titled "Hottest Schools", it undoubtedly would be deleted. This is academic boosterism. Lastly, Wikipedia is not intended to be a collection of lists of loosely associated stuff, a reporter of news (since we're just pushing forward Newsweek's article), and considering we are not here to haruscupate, extrapolate, speculate, etc., we should not be determining right now by giving this article credence, whether this term "New Ivies" will experience longevity or be a new force in higher education. How do we know next year's list won't be "Newer Ivies"? If it's not a "flash in the pan" after a few years, the article would be more than welcome. Right now, it's a newborn, and unless the newborn were the Prince of Wales, the Second Coming of the Messiah, or the next Panchen Lama, this enumeration of "New Ivies" hasn't been around long enough to do something worth noting here. &mdash;06:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)


 * DELETE as nom. &mdash;ExplorerCDT 06:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator. If this were "Newsweek's list of Movers and Shakers" or something along those lines, it never would have been created, but because the title of the list is tied to the Ivy League, it's maintainted an inch of traction here.  The nom said that it's not Wikipedia's job to report the news, but I'd go even further: this isn't news anyway, it's simply editorial opinion, Newsweek's scholastic truthiness.  If, in a decade, this has gained such traction that other sources of media anticipate its coming and report on Newsweek's new New Ivies findings, then fine, it deserves a place here.  But as it stands, it's not ready for article space; it's merely boosterism. JDoorj a m     Talk 07:26, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as neologism from a single magazine. --Metropolitan90 07:57, 25 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per very complete nom. Yomangani talk 12:04, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom ST47 12:38, 25 August 2006 (UTC)''


 * If I see more cites elsewhere, I'll reconsider. But as long as Newsweek is the only organization neologizing this, delete. Alba 12:40, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per various comments sensing that the word "Ivies" was just a publicity gimmick. These colleges are highly selective, as are the Ivies, but other than that there's no given definition of why these schools are Ivy-like. SliceNYC 21:56, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Inherently notable concept. The nomination chargesthat this concept was 1) invented by Newsweek to sell magazines (a tautology in the sense that everything Newsweek does is with the intention of selling magazines) 2) That this is "boosterism" of the specified schools (so what? Does it delegitimize Newsweek's coverage of any other notable institution to label that "boosterism") 3) That this will be a "flash in the pan", an argument of the form, "It's of note now, but won't be in a year" (if I created articles on "Hula Hoop" or "Barbie doll", could those be listed for deletion on the grounds that "Nobody will care about this in a year?)


 * Since all of these arguments are silly we should keep this interesting article around. Allon FambrizziAllon Fambrizzi


 * Delete as listcruft born of the publicity machine. And yes, if hula hoops and Barbie dolls had just been invented and only one magazine had spoken of them, there's a strong chance I'd vote delete there, too.  Anville 20:32, 26 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete If we listed every random neologism anyone found in a magazine... LaszloWalrus 01:31, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep I've heard the term used before and I think the entry should stay, if for nothing else, to explain the term and its origin and usage. NoRCaLD503 18:13, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Was it used before with this specific meaning, or just an informal description of some up-and-coming or under-appreciated set of schools? DMacks 20:18, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Could we have a source citation for its prior use? Dpbsmith (talk) 20:20, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Only source cited is Newsweek, which originated the term. This should not be considered until there are other good, verifiable sources meeting the WP:RS guidelines that show that the Newsweek's list has achieved general recognition as a legitimate grouping with a convenient name. By a good source, I would not include individual universities' publicity offices news releases announcing their pleasure at being a New Ivy. I would include college guides that reference this group as a group, or a reference in a novel or short story or biography--"I went to Kenyon College, supposedly one of the 'new Ivies,'" etc. (And I don't think the term is likely to catch on, because this is a dogs-breakfast of miscellaneous institutions with nothing in common but Newsweek's liking of them. I suppose Newsweek can define "ivy" any way they please, but to use it to refer to an unaccredited institution whose 0.04-century history has barely allowed time for grass to grow, much less ivy, seems premature at the very least. Come to think of it, I wonder what possible objective definition of "ivy" could include Olin but exclude Babson?) Dpbsmith (talk) 20:20, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per nomination. Cornell Rockey 19:03, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. DMacks 19:20, 30 August 2006 (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.