Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Weigle Information Commons

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 redirect to Van Pelt Library. Spartaz ^Humbug! 19:10, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weigle Information Commons

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

Non-notable study/technology-resource space in a college library. This is a massive page with no virtually no encyclopediac content at all (WP:UNDUE). Extensive list of software and student study-space configurations? The minutiae of the building/design process? List of major donors? The major claims of notability appear to be how often it's used by students and how many or how modern its resources, all self-sourced, all "nothing special about this compared to every other school's similar-sounding thing". Seems more like a compendium of the project's own website than a WP article. DMacks (talk) 05:10, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We are new to Wikipedia and will update our entry after reviewing the comments and suggestions above. We will get in touch in a few days with questions and requests for clarification. Pennwic (talk) 13:17, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I just took a crack at editing/rewriting the article, taking into account DMacks's highly relevant criticisms. The original article certainly went well past what a WP is generally expected to be, but a Google Scholar search shows that its notability extends beyond that of a simple study space. (see http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Weigle+Information+Commons%22 for details) It absolutely needs additional edits, but it is much improved, and in its current state makes much less sense as a candidate for deletion.

-Bindingtheory (talk) 19:40, 23 May 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. —• Gene93k (talk) 14:29, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 14:30, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Why do we need a separate article on just part of the campus library system? This is something that belongs within the Van Pelt Library article. Nyttend (talk) 12:31, 31 May 2011 (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.