Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University of Richmond School of Professional & Continuing Studies


 * 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 University of Richmond. No secondary sources cited, but still can merge some primary source paraphrase. czar 00:32, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

University of Richmond School of Professional & Continuing Studies

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence of notability ElKevbo (talk) 02:42, 18 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Is being one of the five schools of the University of Richmond not considered notable in and of itself? Must a school or division of a university be considered independently notable to have its own page? University of Richmond is tied at #25 in national liberal arts colleges according to U.S. News & World Report College Rankings. Degree programs listed on the rankings page include degree options offered exclusively by the School of Professional & Continuing Studies, including Post-bachelor's certificates and Post-Master's certificates. The majority of the University of Richmond's graduate degrees are offered through the School of Professional & Continuing Studies as well. --Ifrabjousday (talk) 15:06, 18 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Notability is not inherited. We need independent sources that specifically focus on this organization, not its parent organization.  I don't think that self-published materials or rankings of programs offered by this school are sufficient to establish notability for the school itself but we'll see if other editors agree or disagree. ElKevbo (talk) 15:14, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I understand the issue and recognize this is discussion that goes well beyond this school and this university. In the meantime, I've started adding references to faculty publications that help make the case for notability. However, school faculty generally align themselves to the university before the school in their publication bios. This may in fact make the case for, rather than against, deletion. --Ifrabjousday (talk) 15:44, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree that it's likely that many constituent units of U.S. colleges and universities - colleges, departments, schools, etc. - are not notable by Wikipedia's definition because there aren't many sources that explicitly focus on them but instead focus on the entire institution or much smaller parts particularly the individual faculty members. There are certainly some exceptions and we must accommodate them but in my experience most of these units exist not as genuinely cohesive units with distinct identities and purposes but they're administrative collections that help with organizational issues e.g., budgets, supervision. Hence they are rarely the explicit focus of independent sources. ElKevbo (talk) 16:54, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd like to make the argument that the School of Professional & Continuing Studies is notable as a constituent unit because it's unique among small liberal arts colleges (SLAC). Most SLACs in the top 25 do not include a community-facing, open-enrollment continuing and higher education unit (CHE) that offers part-time degrees separate from the main institution. While the main institution offers BA and BS degrees in a number of majors, our school offers its own degrees and majors, taught by its own faculty, and scheduled and priced completely separately from the main institution. Our undergraduate and graduate degrees are professional focused and generally unavailable to students in the main institution. Our unit is not simply an organizational or budgetary unit. We have our own full-time and part-time faculty, our own application processes, our own academic procedures. Our focus as a CHE on a SLAC is making accessible and affordable the often-exclusive resources of the institution to our local community. While this would not be notable at a state institution or land-grant university, this aspect is notable among our competition. --Ifrabjousday (talk) 14:15, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:13, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:13, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:13, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 08:50, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * I would recommend deletion for the reasons enumerated above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smacktalking (talk • contribs) — Smacktalking (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   14:07, 2 August 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanamonde (Talk) 02:20, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect or Merge. Not notable to be a stand alone article - Redirect or merge to University of Richmond. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 05:33, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge to University of Richmond. When you strip out the simple listings (everything except the lead) per WP:NOTDIRECTORY there are only a few sentences. There is no reason why these can't be contained in the University of Richmond article.Pontificalibus 07:27, 10 August 2019 (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.