Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Public Health


 * 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The result was   nomination withdrawn (non-admin closure). Artichoke2020 (talk) 02:25, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Public Health

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

No sources and mainly consists of external links and information taken from the school website by a member of that school. Artichoke2020 (talk) 19:59, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.   —TerriersFan (talk) 20:17, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete I suppose, unless someone can add secondary sources. 20:24, 6 May 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gimghoul28 (talk • contribs)
 * Strong Merge into Schools of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Gimghoul28 (talk) 23:48, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge into University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill or new article Schools of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Tertiary, degree awarding bodies are notable. It is an editorial judgement as to how best to organise the material but we don't delete notable content for lack of sources; we look for improvement. TerriersFan (talk) 20:28, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Strongly oppose a merge to the main UNC page as it is now a good length, but Schools of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill could be good if someone can extract the good information. Artichoke2020 (talk) 20:38, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I think that the absence of content on the Schools seems quite a significant omission from the main UNC page. If this suggestion is adopted, then all that would need be added to the main page is a summary section. I would add that the time that we delete notable pages is when the content cannot be verified; here it plainly can be against the schools' websites. In the view of your comment I have amended my recommendation. TerriersFan (talk) 20:49, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. It is easier to categorize a single school than an article on a bunch of schools within a university. The three schools are unlikely to share many references or external links. --Eastmain (talk) 02:35, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - Remember (talk) 15:38, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep major professional schools at distinguished universities usually have sufficient notability on their own account, and sufficient material for a good article--its the logical unit. I suppose if knowledgable people work on it, they'll find articles here for a few dozen notable alumni. However, some if it is sufficiently PR-like to warrant rewriting and a very close look for copyvio. DGG (talk) 02:58, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - per DGG. SuMadre (talk) 03:59, 9 May 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.