Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zanvyl Krieger School of Arts and Sciences


 * 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.  JGHowes   talk  02:32, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Zanvyl Krieger School of Arts and Sciences

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Subject does not appear to be independently notable apart from its parent institution ElKevbo (talk) 21:02, 22 November 2020 (UTC) I am also nominating the following related articles for the same reason:


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  21:08, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  21:08, 22 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment seeing as the institutions are only notable because of their parent institution, I think a merge or redirect would be appropriate. Balle010 (talk) 04:46, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 14:38, 26 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Redirect all, merging as appropriate. Mccapra (talk) 05:18, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep All All the departments in the university are split into seperate articles, as other universities do on Wikipedia. Why was this nominated, when it is such a common pattern? I could point you to two dozen similar university articles. They is hundreds of university articles that do the same.  scope_creep Talk  12:37, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, there are many other similar articles about non-notable topics that should also be improved or deleted. We have been very lax in this area. If you believe that these specific articles should be kept, your argument would be strengthened by citing Wikipedia policy or by finding and adding sources to these articles that clearly establishes them as independently notable. ElKevbo (talk) 13:21, 30 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. Without question, as it stands this article needs heavy-handed revising because its sources are all primary, lending a somewhat promotional tone. There is barely a passing mention of the alum whose name it bears, for example. Because under WP:NEXIST, an article's subject can be notable if such sources exist, even if they have not been named yet, I offer 3 insependent sources below that help establishing WP:GNG. There are more, but I have run out of time today. Cheers! — Grand&#39;mere Eugene (talk) 20:51, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
 * https://www.nytimes.com/1992/12/21/us/johns-hopkins-receives-50-million-endowment.html?searchResultPosition=1
 * https://www.newspapers.com/clip/64331344/scholarships-honor-6-hopkins-alumni/
 * https://www.newspapers.com/clip/64330629/hopkina-plan-to-change-paymentt-for/
 * I respectfully disagree that those sources pass WP:GNG. I further disagree with the implicit assumption that a college of an otherwise eminently notable university must de facto be independently notable. Some colleges have rich histories and traditions and are unquestionably notable. But other colleges are administrative aggregations of departments and other units with little or no shared history. We have to come to terms with this immense imbalance of notability of colleges (and other units such as departments and institutes) at notable universities. ElKevbo (talk) 21:31, 30 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment Why do you think it is not-notable when Johns Hopkins is one the largest and best medical teaching hospitals in the United States?  It puzzles me some somewhat that these are being nominated. Generally speaking all majors university departments if they are part established universities are notable, and as far as I can see these are. They may be promotional, but promotion doesn't mean deletion.    scope_creep Talk  09:18, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Notability is not inherited. If there is an established exception for colleges of notable universities, please cite it. If there is evidence that these specific colleges are independently notable, please provide it. ElKevbo (talk) 13:23, 2 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment If you see promotional content in an article, cut it right out. Be Bold. Do it. We are not here to represent the various facets of society as a representation of their needs and wants. We are here to represent facts and knowledge. Only. So if you see a lot of puff, cut it out, whole blocks, paragraphs, sections,  even the whole article, except the lede, which I've had to do in the past, if it is particularly bad.  Somebody will be back along to rework it, particularly if it is a paid article. If it is not, then it better with out it.   scope_creep Talk  09:27, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. I've begun trimming and replacing promotional text with relevant history items cited to RS. It's a start, and others are invited to join the fun. For such a renowned institution, it's appalling it was written bereft of independent, secondary sources. I'm confident more sources will be found. Cheers! — Grand&#39;mere Eugene (talk) 21:50, 2 December 2020 (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.