Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unseen University (3rd nomination)


 * 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. Only because there are no arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:06, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Unseen University
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Non-notable fictional educational establishment. No significant coverage in independent third-party sources, so fails WP:GNG. While the last AFD was closed as "keep", no significant coverage was demonstrated, and no references have since been added to the article. Notability is not inherited (WP:NOTINHERITED) by consensus, so the fact that it is an element in a notable fiction should not be a justification for keeping. Claritas § 16:54, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. I see nothing that has changed for the worse since the last AfD, just 4 months ago. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:18, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * There's still no significant coverage in reliable sources. Claritas § 17:21, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Keep. I am at a loss to understand why this article, out of all the Discworld articles, is being repeatedly targeted for deletion. This is a very notable fictional location in a very notable series of novels. It currently serves as the redirect for several notable fictional characters, such as Librarian (Discworld), Mustrum Ridcully and Ponder Stibbons. Were this article deleted, all those other articles would have to be recreated as well. It's not as if this is the only, or even the worst, example of its type on Wikipedea. I fail to see why it is being made a whipping boy. This article is much improved since its last AfD and will improve in future.  Serendi pod ous  18:48, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Can you substantiate the claim that it is "very notable". There's currently no sources at all in the article, and I can't find any significant independent coverage on the net. Thanks. Claritas § 21:38, 19 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Here it is referenced in dozens of scholarly papers. That should show that it at least is notable.  Serendi pod ous  21:46, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll deal with the first two pages of these papers:

A lot of trivial mentions, and little substantial coverage. 21:57, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * "UC can build on land-grant idea" isn't about the Discworld plot element. It just happens to use the phrase.
 * "AMERICA'S GREAT SUCCESS STORY--THE LAND-GRANT UNIVERSITY" is the same paper under a different title.
 * "White Knowledge and the Cauldron of Story: The Use of Allusion..." isn't independent because it's written by Pratchett
 * "The Blame Culture: school effectiveness guarantees failures–Discuss" makes a reference to it, but doesn't exactly provide significant coverage.
 * "22.1 Coreset for Directional Width" isn't independent because it's written by Pratchett
 * "He Do the Time Police in Different Voices" - mentions in passing, not a reliable source.
 * "The space eater" - mentions a passing, again not a RS
 * "Islam and Democracy in Turkey: Toward a reconciliation?" - nothing to do with Pratchett
 * "Mathematics, the media, and the public" - some coverage.
 * "RANDOM JOTTINGS" - not RS
 * "Enhanced User Experiences through Relationship Management" - mentioned in passing, not significant coverage.
 * ALEXIAD - doesn't seem to be a RS
 * " Discussion Paper on Copyright and Intellectual Property Issues in the open and E-Learning Environment" - no significant coverage.
 * "A study of the translation of names and invented words in Terry Pratchett's Soul Music" - not significant coverage, translation study.
 * "Teach the Children: Education and Knowledge in Recent Children's Fantasy" - can't access to see whether there's significant coverage.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:05, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep for the same reasons as last time. Nominator is encouraged to add sources for this notable fictional element. (Hint: the previous nomination has plenty) Jclemens (talk) 00:19, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * There's no way this should be a redlink. It would be tenable to argue for a trim, merge and redirect to the amazingly notable Discworld, but it's simply untenable to argue for outright deletion because this is such a plausible search term.  Speedy close and take the keep/redirect discussion to the talk page.— S Marshall  T/C 01:15, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep : Renominating after 4 months without any policy having changed is simply forum shopping. If the nom has problems with the previous closure, DRV is the correct venue. -- Cycl o pia talk  19:56, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep Seems to be a frivolous nomination. A search of scholarly sources immediately reveals detailed coverage in sources such as "The character name translations in the Finnish translation of Terry Pratchet's Lords and Ladies".  Colonel Warden (talk) 21:29, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * That's not significant coverage of the university, that's just someone using the names of the fictional elements as part of an exercise in translation comparison......Claritas § 13:00, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh yes it is!. Colonel Warden (talk) 09:54, 22 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep. I am not a big fan of articles on fictional places and people, but if we are going to have them, we certainly should have one on this topic. I see no more reason to delete this article than to delete all the very many other articles on Pratchett places and people. Deleting this would also, as suggested above, mess up a lot of links. The Pratchett fans need to work on sources, but is anyone challenging any material here? It all looks correct. Readers will want to come to read it. We would be the worse without it. Deletion should not be considered. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  22:27, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - If I remember the last AfD, the librarian was actually notable, while the university was not. Probably a few other characters in there with RS mentions.  Best to keep in all in one place until someone wants to make a bunch of GAs out it. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 03:36, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - This article should not be removed until there is something better to replace it with. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.188.101.65 (talk) 07:05, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep It was nominated in November of 2009, then in February of 2010, and now again in June of 2010. We don't need to keep doing this every few months.  Notability was established already.  Those who actually have read the series say so.   D r e a m Focus  21:09, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - Even on their own, multiple widespread passing references to the Unseen University would evidence its notability in contemporary popular culture and beyond. -- Pedant17 (talk) 01:59, 25 June 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.