The result of the debate was delete. SushiGeek 03:09, 11 April 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not for advertising; overall unencyclopedic material. Also, most of the information was summed up in the main university article already and needs nothing more, in my opinion. Buchanan-H e rmit™.. CONTRIBS.. SPEAK! 05:54, 6 April 2006 (UTC) reply
Comment Its not advertising its merely stating facts now. It was advertising before though.
( 154.20.180.73). Buchanan-H e rmit™.. CONTRIBS.. SPEAK! 05:46, 7 April 2006 (UTC) reply
( 154.20.180.73). Buchanan-H e rmit™.. CONTRIBS.. SPEAK! 05:46, 7 April 2006 (UTC) reply
relevant content (buildings and organizations are way more notable than penis sizes for Wikipedia contributors). Also, STOP BEGGING THE QUESTION by declaring something unnotable just because you are a snob. You are wrong, as there is significant disagreement about the definition of notability. Enough with the slipperly slope arguments!-- Nick Dillinger 19:46, 10 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. SushiGeek 03:09, 11 April 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia is not for advertising; overall unencyclopedic material. Also, most of the information was summed up in the main university article already and needs nothing more, in my opinion. Buchanan-H e rmit™.. CONTRIBS.. SPEAK! 05:54, 6 April 2006 (UTC) reply
Comment Its not advertising its merely stating facts now. It was advertising before though.
( 154.20.180.73). Buchanan-H e rmit™.. CONTRIBS.. SPEAK! 05:46, 7 April 2006 (UTC) reply
( 154.20.180.73). Buchanan-H e rmit™.. CONTRIBS.. SPEAK! 05:46, 7 April 2006 (UTC) reply
relevant content (buildings and organizations are way more notable than penis sizes for Wikipedia contributors). Also, STOP BEGGING THE QUESTION by declaring something unnotable just because you are a snob. You are wrong, as there is significant disagreement about the definition of notability. Enough with the slipperly slope arguments!-- Nick Dillinger 19:46, 10 April 2006 (UTC) reply