Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Newsweek's List of the 1,000 Top U.S. Schools (2005)


 * 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 of the debate was DELETE. -Doc ask? 18:41, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Newsweek's List of the 1,000 Top U.S. Schools (2005)
67 KB page. Space filler. Non-encycloedic. Too many publications run too many top ten/hundered lists - such lists are highly subjective and POV. Wikipedia doesn't need them. Delete. See also: India Today's top 10 colleges of India. utcursch | talk 05:24, 11 November 2005 (UTC).


 * Comment Somewhat useful in determining notability for HS articles when they come up for AfD (which is often). Is there a good place to move this?  --W.marsh 05:34, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * The lists is available at Newsweek's available here - this will solve problem of determining notability of schools. 203.76.181.38 05:40, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * That anon was me. utcursch | talk 05:40, 11 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete, doubtful copyright situation since the list is not discussed in any critical way- the criteria for compiliing the list aren't even described and as the nominator points out it is unencyclopedic.--nixie 05:43, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh yes! I just noticed that there is no 2004 list on Newsweek's website. And there is no 2004 list here. This is a copyvio as well. utcursch | talk 06:16, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, per WP:NPOV. Please don't assume wikipedia users have internet access. Kappa 06:22, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Ha, Kappa, wonderful, that goes in my Doc's list of 10 top WP humour!--Doc ask? 09:54, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * It's not as silly as it sounds; Jimbo Wales recently announced plans to try to release a version of Wikipedia on disc for use in underprivileged areas. I still voted delete on this though. flowersofnight (talk) 18:45, 13 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep technically this is not a copyvio, we specify source, and a list of school names is not copyrightable data. Had we included other original content from the article THEN it would be a copyvio, a pure list is not copyrightable.  ALKIVAR &trade;Radioactivity symbol.png 07:09, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. This is most likely a copyright violation. See also Articles for deletion/Newsweek’s List of Top High Schools (2003). Tagging for now. encephalon  07:40, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment - We should probably instead refer this to the fair-use Wikiproject. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 10:04, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep as per vote above. CalJW 13:38, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. If this list were put directly on Wikipedia it would be deleted as inherently POV.  Having it published first by a magazine without an NPOV rule does not address that.  It's also going to change year by year.  If a school comes high in the rankings, let them say so in their article, but I see no purpose in redistributing listcruft. - Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] :: AfD? 13:55, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete copyvio nonencyclopedic pile of schoolcruft.  Grue  14:31, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. Hi there. This is your friendly neighborhood IP lawyer. Listing the names of the schools can not be a copyvio, because Newsweek is simply taking a set formula and applying it to publicly available facts about the schools in question. See Feist v. Rural. The formula itself is merely an idea, and is not subject to copyright; only the expression of the idea can be protected, and the listing here does not duplicate the expression because it differs significantly from the layout of the Newsweek list. See Kregos v. Associated Press, 937 F.2d 700 (2d Cir. 1991). I've maintained such a list - indeed one more similar to Newsweek's own - in my user space for quite some time without fear of legal action, because I'm quite confident that this is no copyvio (and even if it was, it would easily qualify as fair use). No vote on the article itself. Cheers! BD2412 T 15:19, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Questionable nomination made to support nomination of India Today's top 10 colleges of India in an attempt to counter claims of systemic bias.--Nicodemus75 16:33, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * This is not an attempt to counter claims of systematic bias. Had I known about existance of "article"s on Newsweek lists earlier, I would have nominated them for deletion along with the India Today list. utcursch | talk 04:33, 12 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep as above and stop afd spam. Trollderella 16:37, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete subjective, non-encyclopedic and possible copyvio, plus available elsewhere. ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 17:46, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong delete: this is a primary source, and it is therefore simply not appropriate material for Wikipedia. We have an article on the lists in general: the lists themselves should merely be linked externally from that article. Consider transwiki-ing to Wikisource if we really have a legal right to duplicate this material - and if they'll take it. &mdash; Haeleth Talk 18:24, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Listcruft.--Isotope23 21:52, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Gamaliel 03:39, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete: Per above and below, specific reiteration of a meaningless list. Geogre 04:00, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep or defer this nomination for deletion until the questions surrounding the legality of this document are resolved at Copyright problems/2005 November 11 by the appropriate personnel. Bahn Mi 09:45, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
 * delete non encyclopedic, 2nd hand reportage, list cruft Pete.Hurd 22:12, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. We're not here to reproduce Newsweek's original research. flowersofnight (talk) 18:45, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, even if it's not a copyvio it just redundant. Foofy 23:53, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep unless it is determined that it is in violation of copyright, in which case it needs to be removed. There appear to be a large number of other lists on Wikipedia which are copied from outside sources, so we should not single this one out solely because it is related to education.  Yamaguchi先生 08:29, 14 November 2005 (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.