Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee List of Colleges and Schools


 * 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   no consensus. No objection to renomination. The nominator's conduct may have cast a bit of a pall over the discussion; I think considering all factors this is a fair reading of the full discussion. Xymmax So let it be written   So let it be done  15:09, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee List of Colleges and Schools

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

This is a meaningless list. All the colleges and schools on this list have their own individual articles with substantial contents. In addition, the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee article already lists these colleges and schools in its academic units section. Revws (talk) 00:40, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Revws (talk) 01:29, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  —• Gene93k (talk) 00:56, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:57, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - WP:POINTy nomination from a single purpose account just back from a edit ban (see here) for trying to stifle discussion on this matter and in an effort to promote articles he feels he owns. I really don't care if this article goes or stays. I created the page as it is clear that a number of the then sub articles on the various Schools and Colleges do not have the significant coverage that the WP:GNG lay down and as an easy way for someone wanting an overview on the Uni a single place to view. As I said earlier, it is clear from actions over the articles he feels he owns them and that he sees this as either a way to annoy or upset me and as a way to make sure that the articles he has created stay in the form he wants. I should also point out that it is entirely possible that Revws has a conflict of interest in this matter and has been warned of such by another editor (see here) it has also been discussed on WP:ANI. Codf1977 (talk) 15:24, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I consider each of the individual colleges or schools listed here notable, as first-order divisions of a major university. But if so, we do not need this article, because the articles would be linked directly from the main article on the University. DGG ( talk ) 00:46, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your comment, however it looks like the Wikipedia:College and university article guidelines are clear that 'In general these organizations are not notable (see WP:ORG)'. Codf1977 (talk) 16:00, 26 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment Separate articles for each of the colleges and schools at UWM are simply not needed. Aside from their college brochure-type information, there is very little content in them, certainly not enough to warrant their own articles. They could be part of the UWM article, or merged with the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee List of Colleges and Schools article. 75.2.209.226 (talk) 18:55, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as this entirely novel list topic contravene the prohibition on original research. As far as I can see, this list, or anything like it, has not be been published anywhere except within Wikipedia, so there is no evidence that it is verifiable, let alone notable. To demonstrate that this topic was not created out of thin air, a verifiable definition is needed to comply with content policy. --Gavin Collins (talk|contribs) 07:56, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * If you are saying it is original research then the source articles must be as all the content was originally merged from the stub articles of the Colleges and Schools (see talk page) Codf1977 (talk) 08:00, 24 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment: Gavin - This [UWM Schools and Colleges] would seem to contravene your contention that this list or anything like it, has not been published anywhere.... Do you agree?--Mike Cline (talk) 16:44, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Black Kite (t) (c) 17:23, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Redirect to University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 17:26, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - Having done some more looking into this issue, and looking at Wikipedia:College and university article guidelines which states :

If an institution's faculties, constituent academic colleges, or academic departments are especially notable or significant they may have their own dedicated article (e.g. Jesus College, Oxford, Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania). In general these organizations are not notable (see WP:ORG) and should not be split off from the main institution article in the absence of significant coverage by reliable, independent sources. If some faculties or academic colleges have significance and others do not, it may be the case that the institution's academic programs as a whole are notable. In this case it may be acceptable to create a separate academics article (see Michigan State University academics, Colleges of the University of Oxford)


 * given that I am not sure that any of the following :


 * University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee College of Engineering and Applied Science
 * University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee College of Health Sciences
 * University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee College of Letters and Science
 * University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee College of Nursing
 * Helen Bader School of Social Welfare
 * Peck School of the Arts
 * University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee School of Architecture and Urban Planning
 * University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee School of Education
 * University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee School of Information Studies
 * Sheldon B. Lubar School of Business
 * University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee School of Public Health
 * University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee School of Freshwater Sciences


 * are "are especially notable or significant" to warrant an article and should be fully merged into this page. Codf1977 (talk) 09:39, 28 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment - For the show case Michigan State University academics, Colleges of the University of Oxford in the guideline you provided. These two subarticles have their own Sub-sub articles for all their individual colleges and schools. There is nothing wrong for creating articles for these colleges and schools. As they are notable either individual or as a whole as a major research university in the US and special role in the education in Wiscosin. Your list article is not helpful to the readers, who are lost among a long list of schools when searching for the one they are interested. At last, guidelines are guidance or suggestions, not law. Revws (talk) 13:59, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment No need to get "lost among a long list of schools". Just use the Table of Contents. That's what it's for. 75.2.209.226 (talk) 14:49, 29 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - unnecessary list. Limeisneom (talk) 08:47, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - Just like Usefulness is not a valid reason to keep, Meaningless and Unnecessary are not valid reasons to delete since all these words are purely subjective. This list serves two list purposes well-information (as it expands the descriptions for each college over what is in the main article), and navigation.  The subject of the list is not OR nor are the contents as there are ample sources to support the existance of these colleges and schools to include an explicit list of them on the UWM site. And it is doubtful that Notability is an issue as a whole or for individual entries.  Agreed, there may be some redundancy here, but that can be dealt with through article improvement, merging, consolidation or whatever, not deletion.--Mike Cline (talk) 14:25, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Most university articles have those nice templates at the bottom. This list is either redundant to that template, or an impediment to getting such a template created. Abductive  (reasoning) 02:48, 3 May 2010 (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.