Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Women's College, University of Sydney

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. J04n(talk page) 11:29, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Women's College, University of Sydney[edit]

The Women's College, University of Sydney (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

DELETE: Non-notable hostel. No independent refs. Many apparently unsupported statements about apparently living people. Nothing obvious in google or google news A Dad Oyster Utters (talk) 07:22, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:44, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:44, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This article certainly needs improvement but that is not a reason for deletion. It needs work. I do not understand the rationale behind "Many apparently unsupported statements about apparently living people". The alumni all have articles that state they were at the College. The only other person mentioned is the principal and that detail is supported by the link to the College web page. The proposer is probably unaware that describing this College as a "hostel" will be seen by the members of the College as a rather unfortunate POV. This is a College that offers more than just a place to sleep. Colleges at the University of Sydney are important institutions. The Women's College has I believe an interesting history as I recall from when I attended a conference there many years ago. It needs work, not deletion. There are 4 more substantial articles on other Colleges and I do not believe there would be consensus to merge them to Accommodation at the University of Sydney, so having that article for just two colleges is not a good idea. I support keeping this article, although due to illness and travel I will not have the time to work on it. --Bduke (Discussion) 22:10, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Note: that the nominator is currently blocked indefinitely. Stuartyeates (talk) 22:31, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Bad nomination. Obviously not a hostel.--Auric talk 03:46, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Per WP:NHS and WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES, places of tertiary education are generally assumed to be inherently notable. I assume that being the oldest Australian university, it models itself on the collegian system as seen in Oxford and Cambridge, which would have been the most obvious examples of British universities to refer to in the 1850s (source here), and hence where colleges are inherently notable in their own right. (Try AfDing this as a "hostel" and see how far you get!) Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:34, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I invite you to read WP:OTHERSTUFF.The question is not (and has never been) "are residential university colleges notable?" the question is (and has always been) "has this particular entity received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject as per the WP:GNG and WP:ORG?" BourbonandRocks (talk) 13:39, 13 March 2013 (UTC) — BourbonandRocks (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
What would your view be on WP:Notability (schools) failing, leaving us to fall back on WP:ORG? As these instiutions are not schools? BourbonandRocks (talk) 14:20, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Universities and University Colleges are not called schools in Australia or the UK. That is a US useage. But more seriously, we do need sources. We need someone to spend time looking for them. --Bduke (Discussion) 21:40, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Anything that has a long article about its opening in 1894 (cite added), and is still in operation, is pretty likely to be notable! --99of9 (talk) 10:46, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • (update) I'm up to 14 cited newspaper articles. Feel free to withdraw/close this whenever you're ready. --99of9 (talk) 11:28, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The nominator is blocked and thus unlikely to withdraw the nomination. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:15, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Obviously not a hostel. I wonder if this nomination is a negative reaction to something given that the nominator has been indefinitely blocked. Duplicate of the other nom. BerleT (talk) 03:30, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Women%27s_College,_University_of_Sydney&oldid=1138861505"