Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University of Minnesota Libraries

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. (non-admin closure) TheSpecialUser ^TSU 00:14, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

University of Minnesota Libraries

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article about the University of Minnesota Libraries, an organization of which I am unsure of whether or not it has enough notability to have its own article. Several sources cited, but most are primary (from the University of Minnesota) and of the others only the ones about the Sherlock Holmes collection are more than passing references (or tertiary sources). Not sure what to do with this one -- wondering what the community thinks. BenTels (talk) 15:03, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - It's an integral part of the university and it's a rather large library system. We have a similar one at University of Michigan Library (which covers the whole system, not just one) for comparison. I also much prefer a single conglomerated article on the various libraries, some of which may be too small to warrant their own article, rather than a chaotic mix of articles about specific library buildings. This isn't to say that a small university without a notable library system should have an article (in case someone gets the idea to make a libraries article for every university), but this is one meets the notability test. Shadowjams (talk) 22:04, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Encyclopedic content. Libraries are community landmarks and the heart and soul of institutions of higher learning. Keep under the policy of Ignore All Rules — use common sense to improve the encyclopedia. Carrite (talk) 01:03, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Even though this is part of the university it is a large organization with several million items in stock. Sources outside the information published by the university are going to be few for most academic libraries. This content could form a section in the article for the university but that would just make it unnecessarily long.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 02:18, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 18:14, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 18:14, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The library systems of major research universities are usually notable . The basic justification is as a first order division of the university. DGG ( talk ) 05:00, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but merge in Kautz Family YMCA Archives, which is a unit of the library system which seems unlikely to be notable. Stuartyeates (talk) 10:14, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:58, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Schools rather than Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Education appropriate (in many English speaking countries higher education institutions are not referred to as schools, though a "school" can be a subdivision of a university)?--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 12:38, 13 September 2012 (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.