Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University of Victoria Computer Science Department


 * 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. History has been preserved at Talk:University of Victoria/University of Victoria Computer Science Department to allow information to be merged. However, only a small amount of information could be merged due to WP:UNDUE considerations.  Spinning Spark  20:31, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

University of Victoria Computer Science Department

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

An Individual department in a good quality research university. No evidence of particular notability. Our usual standard is to be one of the half-dozen or so highest ranking departments in the world, (or, equivalently, of world-famous.)    I note the only 3rd party references are to various faculty publications-- except for the most famous departments, this will usually be the case, which is why they almost always fail notability

No evidence of particular distinction even within the country. Lists of research groups,  and joint programs is not encyclopedic content. There is nothing here that is not covered in the departments web site. and almost everything about the academic program will be of interest only to students there or prospective students.

To anticipate a possible argument, having a few notable faculty is not sufficient: since most full professors at major research universities in the world have been judged notable here, using such a standard would make every department in every research university notable. I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to a policy of doing that, but it is not our present practice.  DGG ( talk ) 21:59, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Indeed, I looked it several times when it still was on top of the pages needed patrol list, and I was thinking whether it needs to be AfDed. I support the deletion according to the nom arguments, at lest in the present shape of the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:04, 12 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:49, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:49, 12 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Cheers, Riley   Huntley  00:30, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Cheers, Riley   Huntley  00:31, 25 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete A fair amount of this is generic information not highly relevant for a WP article (programs), and the rest can be merged to the university article. Reywas92 Talk 02:24, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete for lack of notability. Can merge with University article.  --  Wikipedical (talk) 08:15, 25 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge to University of Victoria. Article refs indicate Mary Sanseverino may be notable. Can't find independent refs establishing particular notability of the department. There are already sections for other departments in the proposed merge target. -—Kvng 05:31, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Like Queen's article of same-day AfD, not a world-class or even nationally outstanding department. Enough to mention in university article.Truth or consequences-2 (talk) 15:22, 2 December 2012 (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.