Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Fraternities and Sororities at George Mason University
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
- 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 No Consensus with the balance of opinion being to retain the information the question is as to where. Gnangarra 06:24, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- List of Fraternities and Sororities at George Mason University (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
This list is not notable. Limited/Localized to one university. Refer to WP:UNI#STRUCTURE - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 21:53, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Clearly does not meet the requirements of the general notability guidelines. Doesn't seem to serve any purpose.—Noetic Sage 02:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been added to the list of university deletions. —Noetic Sage 02:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - localized in scope, mere listing of information. Maybe send the info back to the GMU page. --RedShiftPA (talk) 17:06, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Up Merge into parent - As this Article will never expand so much as to become unwieldy, merge it into the George Mason University Article. Exit2DOS2000•T•C• 13:39, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep This list was spun off from the main GMU article just a couple days ago, presumably for space reasons. I'm asserting that this is really a subsection of the GMU page and not a separate article, and therefore the "notability is not inherited" mantra does not apply. Squidfryerchef (talk) 20:12, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge back into the university, it's not going to grow short of the addition of another greek organization so space concerns aren't really valid. It has no notability outside the Uni and someone who is curious as to the greek life at a certain uni will look at the uni, not for a separate list. TRAVELLINGCARIMy storyTell me yours 18:37, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No, space concerns have nothing to do with whether the article is expected to grow or not. But there is a space concern with the present GMU article which is pages and pages long. Squidfryerchef (talk) 20:06, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps I should cite WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not a crystal ball? This list is not notable now... as in right now. If it gains notability somehow in the future, I believe readding this material will not be a problem. And you're right, GMU's article size is fairly large, but not as nearly as large as MIT, currently sizing up at 82kb. I admire you for taking the initiative to break off sections from the main article into smaller articles for easy reading and "keeping within general guidelines of not exceeding 32kb", but perhaps you might want to split off core sections that are more notable into separate articles, such as notable people of GMU, academics, athletics (if the team is actually notable, not just NCAA membership). You had the right idea, just this list is not notable at all. This list should have stayed in its respective Student Life section. - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 01:15, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No, I don't see what the "crystal ball" rule has to do with this one. This list will probably stay the same for years. I'm asserting that while this list lives in a separate article for technical purposes ( WP prefers pages stay under 32K I think ), it's really a subsection of the GMU article which takes care of notability, and is no different than a photograph or other media that lives in a separate file. Though, I wasn't the one who made the split. Squidfryerchef (talk) 13:59, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This page is a subsection of a notable article. However, the material itself is not notable by itself due to its limited scope and coverage in depth. This is simply a list of links of student organizations on one university campus and Wikipedia does have a policy on WP:NOT#LINK. - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 18:26, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Only 3 of them have external links, and these seem to be as references. It isn't a collection of links to each chapter's website. Squidfryerchef (talk) 21:23, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Uh... Please read the guideline again. WP:NOT#LINK specifically say that it should not be a "mere collections of internal links". Although the title may qualify for WP:L, the content is not used to organize GMU's article, but to merely display every single Greek Life organization that exist(s/ed) in GMU. This is not right. This list does not enhance the organization of the original article. In fact, the listing of these organizations is completely unnecessary, as student organizations in a university should be kept in the Student life section. This list will grow outdated once a fraternity's (or sorority's) charter is revoked, expired, or just cease to exist one reason or another. It is better for GMU to update this list of organizations on their student life website rather than listing old information in our articles. Trim (existing organizations only) & Upmerge, no redirect will be my vote. - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 22:22, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This list will grow outdated. Most Greek organizations on a college campus stay there for decades. Squidfryerchef (talk) 01:37, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay... you said most not all. Can you guarantee that the list of every single fraternity and sorority at GMU will stay exactly the same in the next 20 years? (using 20 years for example taken from the word "decades") What I'm saying is, why keep a potentially outdated list with limited scope and notability (not to mention the mere collection of internal links)? An external link to the university's list of student organizations on the GMU main article should suffice. - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 05:01, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Any article on Wikipedia could become outdated in 20 years. Squidfryerchef (talk) 12:45, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well then, your usage of the word decades may not be appropriate then. - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 21:46, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Any article on Wikipedia could become outdated in 20 years. Squidfryerchef (talk) 12:45, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay... you said most not all. Can you guarantee that the list of every single fraternity and sorority at GMU will stay exactly the same in the next 20 years? (using 20 years for example taken from the word "decades") What I'm saying is, why keep a potentially outdated list with limited scope and notability (not to mention the mere collection of internal links)? An external link to the university's list of student organizations on the GMU main article should suffice. - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 05:01, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This list will grow outdated. Most Greek organizations on a college campus stay there for decades. Squidfryerchef (talk) 01:37, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Uh... Please read the guideline again. WP:NOT#LINK specifically say that it should not be a "mere collections of internal links". Although the title may qualify for WP:L, the content is not used to organize GMU's article, but to merely display every single Greek Life organization that exist(s/ed) in GMU. This is not right. This list does not enhance the organization of the original article. In fact, the listing of these organizations is completely unnecessary, as student organizations in a university should be kept in the Student life section. This list will grow outdated once a fraternity's (or sorority's) charter is revoked, expired, or just cease to exist one reason or another. It is better for GMU to update this list of organizations on their student life website rather than listing old information in our articles. Trim (existing organizations only) & Upmerge, no redirect will be my vote. - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 22:22, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Only 3 of them have external links, and these seem to be as references. It isn't a collection of links to each chapter's website. Squidfryerchef (talk) 21:23, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This page is a subsection of a notable article. However, the material itself is not notable by itself due to its limited scope and coverage in depth. This is simply a list of links of student organizations on one university campus and Wikipedia does have a policy on WP:NOT#LINK. - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 18:26, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No, I don't see what the "crystal ball" rule has to do with this one. This list will probably stay the same for years. I'm asserting that while this list lives in a separate article for technical purposes ( WP prefers pages stay under 32K I think ), it's really a subsection of the GMU article which takes care of notability, and is no different than a photograph or other media that lives in a separate file. Though, I wasn't the one who made the split. Squidfryerchef (talk) 13:59, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps I should cite WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not a crystal ball? This list is not notable now... as in right now. If it gains notability somehow in the future, I believe readding this material will not be a problem. And you're right, GMU's article size is fairly large, but not as nearly as large as MIT, currently sizing up at 82kb. I admire you for taking the initiative to break off sections from the main article into smaller articles for easy reading and "keeping within general guidelines of not exceeding 32kb", but perhaps you might want to split off core sections that are more notable into separate articles, such as notable people of GMU, academics, athletics (if the team is actually notable, not just NCAA membership). You had the right idea, just this list is not notable at all. This list should have stayed in its respective Student Life section. - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 01:15, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No, space concerns have nothing to do with whether the article is expected to grow or not. But there is a space concern with the present GMU article which is pages and pages long. Squidfryerchef (talk) 20:06, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- merge back to whence it came. Not really notable on its own, and with the side disadvantage that splitting it off means it's now unreferenced. Anyway, though precedence is not supposed to guide us, the thought of thousands of list of fraternities and sororities at college x articles makes me whimper. -- phoebe/(talk) 07:00, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment While I do feel this information ought to exist on the Wikipedia, we already have pages on national fraternities that list the different chapters. Perhaps this could be better handled by a "Greek Life" VDE which could be added to the bottom of college articles and link back to articles on national fraternities. Squidfryerchef (talk) 21:23, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep logically part of the parent article and spun off due to WP:SIZE. Notability is of the topic as a whole. Hobit (talk) 01:24, 19 March 2008 (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.