Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gilbrea Centre for Studies in Aging

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 merge to McMaster University. (Selective merge) (non-admin closure) —UY Scuti ^Talk 20:23, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gilbrea Centre for Studies in Aging[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

academic center within a department of a university. These are not ordinarily notability DGG ( talk ) 18:55, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:47, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:47, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Selective Merge to McMaster University, which presently has no mention of this research center. This will improve and enhance the merge target article, per WP:PRESERVE. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:49, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:NORG. Also, considering that the creator's first edit was a vandalism, I would be careful about merge - this can be a hoax, or such. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:41, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That was not vandalism, he was actually fixing some poorly written prose. Check the diff again. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:42, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a hoax insofar that its existence is verifiable. Here's the official website. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:47, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, thanks. Of course it's not a hoax. It's instantly verifiable by a Google Search, its university website is right there--including quite a few news article mentions in major Canadian outlets, mostly tied to its director, a Gail Elliott. Honest to god, some of the garbage I see at Afd... <shakes head.> Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:52, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:46, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:48, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:48, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Selective merge per Northamerica1000. It seems to be doing some vital work and its director, Gail Elliott, has been quoted in news stories about aging issues by CBC, National Post, etc. but it does not (yet) seem to have enough independent notability for a separate article. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:11, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Selective Merge per Northamerica1000. Not enough coverage for a standalone article, and merging some of the info would definitely fill a void in the target article. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:26, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as mentioned, perhaps not solidly notable but at best can be mentioned there. SwisterTwister talk 19:03, 14 January 2016 (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.