Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Claremont School of Theology

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP. Postdlf 23:54, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Claremont School of Theology

I initially tagged this as a speedy (ad spam), which the poster objected to. So I'm posting it here instead. Non-notable. Firebug 06:45, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, not notable, promo. Megan1967 08:47, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• List of degree programs with a link isn't an article. Contains next to no info about the school. Delete. Mgm|^(talk) 10:09, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
• Although the brevity of the article wouldn't make it big deal if were to be deleted, I will still vote keep here: This isn't exactly the University of Tübingen or Harvard Divinity School, but it appears to be a real degree-granting institution, with faculty members who have been published in scholarly journals. I think there is an established consensus here that real institutions of higher education are inherently notable. Even community colleges count, and this is something above that level. - Uppland 10:23, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • PS. You should probably have given it more than two minutes to develop before stamping it with a speedy delete tag. - Uppland 10:28, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• I would think this a perfect example of linkspam, thus delete. Radiant_* 14:14, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
• No vote, but note that advertising is not grounds for speedy. At best you can throw a nowiki tag in. Meelar (talk) 15:07, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep per Uppland 10:23, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC). —msh210 17:28, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• I've now stubbified it with some real information. Keep —Wahoofive | Talk 17:48, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and list on Schoolwatch to further "stack the vote". Kappa 18:17, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Real tertiary institution and well done Wahoofive for his additions. Capitalistroadster 23:21, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep current version --Carnildo 00:23, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• weak keep. The article needs expansion, as at present it just scrapes over the notability bar for me. Thryduulf 00:27, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep institutions of higher education. Shimmin 00:31, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and expand. I didn't know that colleges had a notability standard, too. --BaronLarf 00:58, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, of course. Stack 'em up, baby! —RaD Man (talk) 01:04, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. They're affilliated with the Claremont Colleges, they're an accredited school, and they educate half the non-reactionary clergypeople in Southern California. Submitting an advert as an article is lame, but not proof of non-notability. ---Isaac R 01:12, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: This nomination was made by yet another account created in the past two weeks that immediately gravitated towards VfD (in this case, within 3 days of account creation). This marks the third incident of this type this week. *sigh* —RaD Man (talk) 01:18, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Excuse me? I've been doing plenty of non-VFD-related edits, and I have voted Keep or Merge on numerous articles that have been put up for VFD. I'm not sure what you're stating or implying here. I put a lot of articles up for VFD because I have been doing RC patrol, and it is very common to see articles that are either nonsense or content-free (and thus candidates for speedy deletion), or articles that are unencyclopedic and have thus been posted here for consideration. If the consensus is to keep this article, I'll go along with this. But I will not be bullied. Don't make veiled threats again. Firebug 03:39, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • It's not supposed to be a threat, just an expression of (hopefully) paranoia. It's related to the fact that we're not doing very well at establishing a consensus on schools. Please continue nominating and voting as you see fit. Kappa 05:26, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • If you view my observations as threats you have problems. Seek help. —RaD Man (talk) 01:31, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
      • Let's keep this civil please. Gamaliel 01:37, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep My understanding is that a concensus had been reached that all tertiery eduction was notable by nature. VfD is articles that are not verifiable, informative, or encyclopedic by nature. Klonimus 03:41, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • To be fair to Firebug the article as it stood when he nominated it was not encylopaedic it was an advert. Thryduulf 08:16, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • True, but I think we're a little too quick to VfD advertising web pages. We tend to assume that they're a kind of spam. Which they often are. But they're also often articles about notable topics that are simply written too subjectively. Very often people VfD them when they should clean them up or make them into stubs. Or maybe just add an "explain significance" notice. ---Isaac R 00:28, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Merge into Claremont, California and delete - Skysmith 07:55, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• keep this because it is a degree granting institution Yuckfoo 21:15, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep . N-Man^talk 11:40, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Certainly more notable than Chumbawumba Grammar School. Gamaliel 01:37, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Institutions of higher education are inherently notable. -- 8^D ^gab 13:25, 2005 Apr 22 (UTC)
• Keep, notable enough for me. --Myles Long 15:52, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. This is a very well-established school with some ties to the Claremont Colleges (though it is not a full member of the Claremont group). An entirely legitimate institution, worthy of an expanded article. BTfromLA 02:09, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• keep there arent that many graduate level schools with degrees in Theology worldwide, this makes Claremont a notable case.  ALKIVAR™ 09:47, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. This is an encyclopedia not a directory. Sorry. Master Thief Garrett 01:39, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: The account User:Master Thief Garrett was created 2 weeks ago. This now marks the fourth such incident. —RaD Man (talk) 06:47, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • um, I'm sorry, but your point is...? I spent most of my "fledgling" time revising other articles etc. and have only moved onto Vfd now that my "pet topics" are pretty much complete and I'm a little more acquainted with the workings here. Is there some problem with me being new to Vfding? That I am misvoting? That I am voting too much and/or too often? That I shouldn't dare suggest a Schoolwatch article be deleted? ....orrrr what? Since you chose the word "incident", your comment sounds fairly negative in tone. Please explain, as I am curious as to what exactly you meant (or didn't mean) by this comment. Thank you. Master Thief Garrett 07:51, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
      • Welcome to Wikipedia, n00b. *hug* —RaD Man (talk) 07:57, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
        • okayyyy... despite the negative connotations others have meant on forums when referring to me as a n00b, and normally I'd be quite offended, I know Wikipedia isn't like that at all, and I'm hoping you're not implying something similar... and you still didn't answer my question, not that it matters... Master Thief Garrett 08:30, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: there are many university and college articles out there that look much worse than this one currently does (just look though some of the categories), and there are probably thousands of institutions less notable than this one too, but they have so far been left alone because of the consensus that institutions of higher education are inherently notable enough to have an article. If some people want to change that policy (or at least de facto policy), I think the right place to do that would be on a policy talk page, not here. Uppland 01:49, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.