- 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. Liz Read! Talk! 00:06, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Center for the History of Women Philosophers and Scientists ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No reliable sources. Only cited sources are press releases, primary sources, or passing mentions. intforce ( talk) 12:40, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academic journals, Philosophy, and Germany. intforce ( talk) 12:40, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, History, and Science. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:17, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
- Keep, as at least some of the refs do appear to be substantive content about the organization or at least some of its specific activities. I'm not sure any of those themselves would be likely to become a well-developed article and/or are of marginal notability. Thus this is a single article for all of that rather than a pile of permastubs. Unlike the usual failure of "notability by association", here the organization is notable because it does multiple (maybe borderline)-notable things.
DMacks (
talk)
00:12, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
- Specific notability of the center itself:
- "Europe’s first center dedicated to the study of women philosophers and scientists...the world’s first joint Master’s ERASMUS program on the history of women philosophers and scientists" [1]
- DMacks ( talk) 20:06, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
- Specific notability of the center itself:
- Keep Its a learned organisation. More coverage will turn up over time and these are generally kept. More so, its orientated towards women which are few and far between. It a solid keep. scope_creep Talk 11:10, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. I would not call this a "learned organisation". Looking at their homepage, it more looks like this "center" is a university department. Those are rarely notable and centers like this one are all too often ephemeral. The only somewhat substantial source is a local newspaper/newsletter called OWL Journal. The rest are library-catalog entries and press releases and such. No sign of WP:SIGCOV, does not meet WP:NORG. -- Randykitty ( talk) 17:10, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
- Merge the content to Ruth Hagengruber, a professor at the university that hosts the center and one of the founders. Research centers are commonly created by professors in many fields. This one is very new and could well come to have an impact on the field, which would be shown by articles about its influence. Currently it is WP:TOOSOON for an independent article. StarryGrandma ( talk) 20:18, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp ( talk) 11:21, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 19:33, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
- Comment. The page has tagged problems with notability and verification. This is a good diagnosis for draftifying. But what makes me doubt it is that it has been live for this for clearly more than half a year now. Suitskvarts ( talk) 11:49, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 08:37, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- Prob delete - seems like it is a university department with only routine coverage in RS. I disagree with redirecting to an individual, I suspect it makes more sense to merge to the university page. JMWt ( talk) 10:44, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- Keep. There appears to be significant coverage of this center in [2] and [3], and passing coverage in [4]. In addition this article serves as our redirected landing page for the Encyclopedia of Concise Concepts by Women Philosophers, the Elisabeth of Bohemia Prize, and the Journal of the History of Women Philosophers and Scientists, as we have no separate articles for those topics, and therefore their notability should be counted toward this article as well, including significant coverage of the prize at [5], [6], [7], and [8]. The journal is unlikely to be independently notable but its coverage in [9] also adds to notability here. Not all university research centers pass WP:GNG, but I think this one does. — David Eppstein ( talk) 21:52, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 12:03, 5 January 2024 (UTC)- Delete per above JM ( talk) 00:58, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, I find David Eppstein's argument persuasive, especially since this article contains notable subtopics. -- asilvering ( talk) 00:52, 12 January 2024 (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.
- 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. Liz Read! Talk! 00:06, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Center for the History of Women Philosophers and Scientists ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No reliable sources. Only cited sources are press releases, primary sources, or passing mentions. intforce ( talk) 12:40, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academic journals, Philosophy, and Germany. intforce ( talk) 12:40, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, History, and Science. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:17, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
- Keep, as at least some of the refs do appear to be substantive content about the organization or at least some of its specific activities. I'm not sure any of those themselves would be likely to become a well-developed article and/or are of marginal notability. Thus this is a single article for all of that rather than a pile of permastubs. Unlike the usual failure of "notability by association", here the organization is notable because it does multiple (maybe borderline)-notable things.
DMacks (
talk)
00:12, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
- Specific notability of the center itself:
- "Europe’s first center dedicated to the study of women philosophers and scientists...the world’s first joint Master’s ERASMUS program on the history of women philosophers and scientists" [1]
- DMacks ( talk) 20:06, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
- Specific notability of the center itself:
- Keep Its a learned organisation. More coverage will turn up over time and these are generally kept. More so, its orientated towards women which are few and far between. It a solid keep. scope_creep Talk 11:10, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. I would not call this a "learned organisation". Looking at their homepage, it more looks like this "center" is a university department. Those are rarely notable and centers like this one are all too often ephemeral. The only somewhat substantial source is a local newspaper/newsletter called OWL Journal. The rest are library-catalog entries and press releases and such. No sign of WP:SIGCOV, does not meet WP:NORG. -- Randykitty ( talk) 17:10, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
- Merge the content to Ruth Hagengruber, a professor at the university that hosts the center and one of the founders. Research centers are commonly created by professors in many fields. This one is very new and could well come to have an impact on the field, which would be shown by articles about its influence. Currently it is WP:TOOSOON for an independent article. StarryGrandma ( talk) 20:18, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp ( talk) 11:21, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 19:33, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
- Comment. The page has tagged problems with notability and verification. This is a good diagnosis for draftifying. But what makes me doubt it is that it has been live for this for clearly more than half a year now. Suitskvarts ( talk) 11:49, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 08:37, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- Prob delete - seems like it is a university department with only routine coverage in RS. I disagree with redirecting to an individual, I suspect it makes more sense to merge to the university page. JMWt ( talk) 10:44, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- Keep. There appears to be significant coverage of this center in [2] and [3], and passing coverage in [4]. In addition this article serves as our redirected landing page for the Encyclopedia of Concise Concepts by Women Philosophers, the Elisabeth of Bohemia Prize, and the Journal of the History of Women Philosophers and Scientists, as we have no separate articles for those topics, and therefore their notability should be counted toward this article as well, including significant coverage of the prize at [5], [6], [7], and [8]. The journal is unlikely to be independently notable but its coverage in [9] also adds to notability here. Not all university research centers pass WP:GNG, but I think this one does. — David Eppstein ( talk) 21:52, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel ( talk) 12:03, 5 January 2024 (UTC)- Delete per above JM ( talk) 00:58, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, I find David Eppstein's argument persuasive, especially since this article contains notable subtopics. -- asilvering ( talk) 00:52, 12 January 2024 (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.