Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Founders College

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 delete. because of a lack of reliable references that make the article unverifiable. I'd be happy to userfy to any user who intends to provide those sources and asks me nicely. Mgm|^(talk) 10:42, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Founders College

Insufficient notability. This was apparently a “college” founded by a bunch of Ayn Rand enthusiasts which existed for only one semester, had only six students, and was housed in a hotel. Even if it was once notable, it’s certainly not now that it’s closed. S.dedalus (talk) 22:47, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per above. --S.dedalus (talk) 22:47, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep It was for a time a licensed (but not accredited) higher educational institution, but perhaps there is some related article to merge it to d. There is no such thing in Wikipedia or any other encyclopedia as something having been notable once upon a time but not now --the basic nature of an encyclopedia is to preserve information about everything that has been important. If anything, this is more a need for non-currently existing things. DGG (talk) 02:16, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment if it was once notable, then it still is. WP:NTEMP. — LinguistAtLarge • Talk 04:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NTEMP says that “If a subject has met the general notability guideline, there is no need to show continual coverage or interest in the topic,” It does NOT say that a subject which no longer exists automatically continues to be notable. --S.dedalus (talk) 06:40, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It does say that a subject that no longer exists, but met the general notability guideline, is presumed notable. That's the point of the section. Notable organizations that cease to exist remain notable as a matter of historical record. Baileypalblue (talk) 23:42, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. While I think that DGG makes some valid points, I think the article still fails, WP:ORG, WP:V, WP:RS and WP:N. Yes, once notable it is not lost. The question here is, was there notability to begin with. Vegaswikian (talk)

I agree that the question is whether the institution was notable to begin with. It has plenty of reliable source coverage, most of these gnews hits relate to it, including nonlocal coverage, but most coverage relates to speculation about the founding/site of the future college. I have a hard time voting "keep" on a project that amounted to so little, even after considering the presumption of notability established by the general notability guideline. Baileypalblue (talk) 01:37, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 00:19, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unnotable instution, nothing about this is notable. Letsdrinktea (talk) 00:20, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. —Cunard (talk) 02:50, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. —Cunard (talk) 02:50, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - degree awarding institutions are notable. The nomination is in error in that it assumes notability is temporary. TerriersFan (talk) 02:57, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is really an event not something of lasting importance, looking at it objectively. Northwestgnome (talk) 03:32, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. While I agree with the above that notability is not temporary, I see nothing here to convince me that this "college" was ever notable. This might have been worth a section in another article, but there is no logical target for a merge.--Kubigula (talk) 04:13, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment all degree granting college are notable, and as roof of it for this one, there are sources available. I am concerned that there may be some unconscious factor involved of thinking of such religiously oriented schools as intrinsically non notable, even they meet the requirements. DGG (talk) 04:39, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I agree that is the precedent and de facto guideline (in the normal English sense, if not the WP sense). But precedents and guidelines allow for exceptions and the application of common sense. For me, an exception is warrented when a college musters seven students and doesn't make it through a full school term. I don't care what their orientation was; I do care whether they had some legitimate impact or achieved anything worth recording. From what I can see, this wasn't even a memorable failure.--Kubigula (talk) 04:53, 24 February 2009 (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.