Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Professor of Modern History, Glasgow


 * 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 Keep. -- lucasbfr talk 10:16, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Professor of Modern History, Glasgow

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Doesn't seem like a notable position at all. No evidence of it meriting its own article Yonatan talk 00:26, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - Unlike the USA (where the term has been devalued so that every univerity lecturer is a professor), the title refers in Great Britain to the head of a university department or another senior and distingusihed academic. Glasgow is one of our older universities.  I consider that the post is automatically notable.  The fact that few of the holders have articles merely inducates that there is work to be done.   Peterkingiron 00:46, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Sorry, but no. If the list were for a dean or a similar position, I'd probably keep it. --Whsitchy 02:58, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment This position would presumably be one level lower than a dean in the heirarchy: head of a department, but not of a faculty. I think that's enough. JulesH 17:08, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge with List of Professorships at the University of Glasgow. Recommend all positions on that list be merged as well. I don't see that the chair itself is worth having an article for. --Dhartung | Talk 05:33, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge. I'm with Dhartung; the lists of professors who have occupied the chairs, and the sentences about their founding (which are the only content these articles have), are not so long that they couldn't all be merged into List of Professorships at the University of Glasgow. Deor 13:09, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge - there is no reason for this particular position to have a seperate article from the fairly short List of Professorships at the University of Glasgow. — Swpb talk contribs 15:44, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment But isn't that just a directory of lists like the one nominated here? JJL 16:53, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge. Make the list article into the compilation, with brief descriptions before each. Some positions may still merit separate articles. (Wow — professorships that go back to the 1600s!) Realkyhick 22:18, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. I really do not see what you are proposing for the merge--the main article is simply a list of the chairs, not the holders. There are 38 professorships listed, with an average of about 10 incumbants. Is it seriously proposed that the article will be better with the 38 sections? Or is it proposed that we should not have the information at all? Since all of these people are certainly notable, a category would do, except that 3/4 of the articles haven't been written. That suggests the third possibility--to do stub articles for every one of the 400 or so, with succession boxes and categories. And there's a fourth--to expand the list with basic biographic data for each of them,which is much faster then writing all those articles. Personally, i consider all 4 ways as satisfactory: separate pages for each chair, one gigantic page, separate articles for each professor, a list for each chair with sections for each professor. I think we should get a much more general consensus before deciding, since it will be a good deal of work either way, & will set precedents for a great many other pages. DGG 06:14, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - as some one who voted Keep above, I fullky support DGG. Peterkingiron 13:49, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletions.   --   &rArr; bsnowball  11:26, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand so it isn't just a list. Lurker  15:23, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per DGG. This is much more useful as an individual article, because merging would become unweildly with large numbers of entries for each individual holder of the position.  If this were repeated for instance for articles like Professor of Divinity, Glasgow (which is a substantially older chair having been held by 27 people), the article would become huge. JulesH 17:08, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - unwieldy to merge, as per User:DGG, and UK professors - at any rate, at the older universities - are pretty much notable by definition, unlike US ones, as per User:Peterkingiron. HeartofaDog 00:25, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - notable position; list of holders is useful for building the web. John Vandenberg 07:59, 3 June 2007 (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.