Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lists of institutions of higher education by endowment

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. Singu larity 17:14, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lists of institutions of higher education by endowment[edit]

Biased article, hard to source and update and not really nessecary Bronzey 09:07, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and improve. Potentially useful article on a major aspect of education finance. Can be sourced with effort. Mowsbury 13:06, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Are the sub-articles on lists of USA and Canadian universities included in this AfD? If not, why not? --Bduke 13:45, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Necessary fork of Financial endowment. Where is the bias? Either a school has the money or it doesn't. Also, most of the listed schools are sourced. Wl219 17:07, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - it's not actually that hard to source. The information is available, just had to make sure it's found and cited before an institution is included in the list. KTC 22:30, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but at the present state its a combination of a disam & redirect for the US and Canada lists, and then a listing for 3 other prominent institutions. I'd think the '"other" category needs to be expanded, and then turned into an article, and this changed into a simple disam. page. DGG (talk) 22:51, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Apparently, someone does source it and update it, although the U.S. and Canadian articles have a lot more content. As the article explains, the endowment is a measure of a university's "wealth". There is a hint that it can be expanded to include a ratio of assets to students served. I don't see what's considered "unnecessary" about this article. Mandsford 23:37, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep In the United States at least the Chronicle of Higher Education publishes this information annually, and for tax reasons it's required that these numbers be disclosed. So it's actually easy to source and update. No idea what's biased about it. --JayHenry 04:54, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's neutral and sourced. Can easily be expanded. Thin Arthur 08:37, 21 August 2007 (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.