Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St marks college adelaide

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 of the debate was keep and rename to St. Mark's College (University of Adelaide).

[edit] St marks college adelaide

Non-notable, poorly written, not linked Sumple (Talk) 05:46, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. I agree it was badly written and was actually a copyvio of the College web site. Why do students want to tell us they drink themselves silly? I have rewritten this article, although it is still a stub. St Mark's is the oldest residential university College in South Australia, affiliated to the oldest university, the University of Adelaide. The current Head of the College is a former Premier of South Australia. I think it is notable. If it is kept, I will move it to St Mark's College, University of Adelaide, a better title. --Bduke 08:02, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

New name should be St Mark's College (University of Adelaide) per {{University of Adelaide colleges}} -- Ian ≡ talk 15:55, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

• Keep (the rewritten version) at St. Mark's College, Adelaide. There are about four three articles that already mention it, although not presently wikilinked. --Scott Davis ^Talk 08:58, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Since we have not agreed on the new name yet, I haven't linked the articles, but there should be links to this topic from the following: North Adelaide, University of Adelaide, NAAUC. --Scott Davis ^Talk 09:32, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

• Keep see the Template:University of Melbourne Colleges and associated articles for what can be done and an example of naming. -- Paul foord 11:47, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
  • created Template:University of Adelaide colleges Paul foord 13:45, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Scranchuse 14:07, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Monicasdude 14:47, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Bduke. Thatcher131 16:09, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and move per Bduke. Article seems in reasonable shape now after judicious editing and it seems notable enough. Capitalistroadster 22:53, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep--cj | talk 02:51, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Capitalistroadster 22:53, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep -- Ian ≡ talk 10:03, 22 March 2006 (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.