Home • Search • Translate
From 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 redirect to Berkeley Student Cooperative. Spartaz Humbug! 18:54, 4 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Lothlorien Hall

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Lothlorien Hall (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

While the co-operative of which it is a part is notable, this small dorm-like building (less than 60 students) is not notable by itself. Searches are difficult due to the Tolkien-themed name (don't know if that is why it was named such, but it is what makes searching difficult), but not nearly enough in-depth coverage from independent, secondary sources to pass WP:GNG. Current sources include two primary sources, one blog, and one nice article. But the article is about the co-operative, not the house, although it is mentioned briefly in the article. Onel5969 TT me 12:58, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 13:11, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 13:11, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply
I disagree WP:NPLACE - "Bars, pubs, cafes, restaurants, and hotels tend not to survive AfD unless multiple independent sources have written about them in non-trivial detail." The notable particularities of this place have elicited multiple independent queries. The examples below are from culture anthropological and urban development fields:
    • Cultural anthropology: "My three years at Lothlorien had convinced me without any doubt that I wanted to live in community for the rest of my life, and that my ideal community would look and feel a lot like Lothlorien. The house is an oasis in Berkeley's otherwise vast and impersonal student setting, where high turnover is endemic... Where many student co-ops struggle to create a lasting identity, Lothlorien succeeds, persisting as an entity unto itself, where the whole is far greater than the sum of its parts." Sterling, Ted. Foundation For Intentional Community; Rutledge Iss. 110, (Spring 2001): 41-44.
    • Urban development: "As the sole vegetarian house in the 1300 member Berkeley Student Cooperative (BSC), Lothlorien became the de facto eco-theme house... utility bills, while low, were not always at the per capita bottom among the 20 BSC co-ops. A look at Lothlorien offers some insights on the unique challenges that co-ops face in environmental performance... Presently Lothlorien uses 125 kWh of electricity per day, just over 2 kWh per person... Solar panels were installed on the roof of South House in 2010. Occupying 3/4 of the roof (the rest is used for solar hot water), these panels produce nearly all of the electricity needed during summer afternoon peak hours when rates are 300% higher than normal... it’s easy to romanticize its image as one of perfection. In actuality greater heights in co-opitecture can be achieved." Lothlorien & the limits of sustainability Note the multiple architectural and engineering diagrams.
  • Delete The Berkeley Student Cooperative is notable, this house is not. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 15:12, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply
    • @ Johnpacklambert: I disagree. Please note the two article I cite in response to Cupper52. One states that "As the sole vegetarian house in the 1300 member Berkeley Student Cooperative (BSC), Lothlorien became the de facto eco-theme house. Elves, as residents of Lothlorien are called, are prominent at the forefront of the green movement" wile the other states that "Where many student co-ops struggle to create a lasting identity, Lothlorien succeeds, persisting as an entity unto itself, where the whole is far greater than the sum of its parts." Rybkovich ( talk) 23:58, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect. If "Lothlorien Hall" is something someone could meaningfully look up on Wikipedia, then it is probably a decent search term that should lead to Berkeley Student Cooperative. – MJL  ‐Talk‐ ☖ 16:06, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Context, this is important info to consider: Affordable housing is a rarity for large universities in big cities. A one bedroom apartment close to UC Berkeley is approximately $2k a month. Berkeley students are fortunate to have an affordable option - Berkeley Student Cooperative (BSC), the largest co-op system in the USA, where food and board are $7,500 per semester. The system can house approx 1,300 students, there is a waiting list to become a member. Getting info about the co-ops is essential. If you go to the BSC page you will see that it is almost impossible to navigate. Different houses have different reputation and character, there is interesting history and specific culture for several halls - BSC is not a just a collection of nearly identical dormitories. Unfortunately, info regarding the distinct halls makes the BSC page very confusing and requires a great effort to find what one is looking for. My project is to trim the huge BSC article and create individual pages for the standout halls that now have large subsections. There is additional relevant info about the particular houses which will make the BSC article even worse if inserted into individual subsections.
Info regarding the stand out houses is really important for the students: Consider two houses Cloyne Court Hotel and Casa Zimbabwe, both have their own character with important differences. For example: Cloyne is a sober house, no drugs or alcohol allowed. If we look at the stats we can see that there are a lot of people looking for this info. If you examine the stats for 2019 (2020 would not be a good example). Casa Zimbabwe had 3,463 views, Cloyne had 2,713.
Out of all the houses, Lothlorien stands out the most. Yet at the same time it is considered a representative of the whole BSC system. It very well fits the hippy stereotype that some still associate with this university and its students. Its a very close community, you can't have meat inside the house, there are gardens and tree houses, and to some extent the community has its own diction and vocabulary. Take a guess on which house was the origin of the nude run through Berkeley libraries at the end of each semester? ;) For the past several years it has been one of the focal points of political activity in the USA. All of the above is essential info for both students making housing decisions (a house full of revolutionaries making phone calls 24 hours a day may not be enticing) and important for those interested in whats going on Berkeley. The article you are looking at right now is the info taken out of a BSC subsection. I'm currently expanding it. There is a lot of historical info in newspaper archives that I'm going through and relevant architectural info (historically and environmentally) that I will be adding. The problem with working on it and expanding the info within the Berkeley Student Cooperative article is that it would be making it even more confusing, which is exactly the opposite of what needs to be done. @ Johnpacklambert:, @ Cupper52:, @ Shellwood:, I'm pinging you just in case. Rybkovich ( talk) 18:52, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply
    • That above demonstrates that BCS is notable, it in no way persuades me that this particular house is notable. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 19:02, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply
      • Johnpacklambert, exactly, which is what I said in the nom. Onel5969 TT me 19:12, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply
        • I disagree that "a very close community, you can't have meat inside the house, there are gardens and tree houses, and to some extent the community HAS ITS OWN DICTION AND VOCABULARY" is not notable info (in addition there are murals running a long the sides of the house that would be presented in a gallery). I can't think of any dorm buildings like that. Also have you considered it as solution to the very serious problem with the BSC article? Please consider the view stats, there is distinctive information that students are basing their decisions on, which is very hard to get to if its retained within the Berkeley Student Cooperative article. Approx 3,000 annual views for each house is not an irrelevant factor. Rybkovich ( talk) 19:19, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply
re notability - "While having house members indirectly committed to a theme does not inevitably produce tension, intra-house dynamics are are highly variable semester to semester. For example, Lothlorien, the vegan/vegetarian-themed house, has also become known as a space of political activism. Lothlorien resident Iman Kazah said, “It took me a long time to learn a certain dialect in Loth,” a house where the culture encourages speaking in a specific rhetoric as to best engender inclusivity". I think that having a co-op house that is closer to being a commune than a dormitory is notable. Rybkovich ( talk) 20:39, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply
re notability - "As the sole vegetarian house in the 1300 member Berkeley Student Cooperative (BSC), Lothlorien became the de facto eco-theme house. Elves, as residents of Lothlorien are called, are prominent at the forefront of the green movement - just in my four years there, we passed a campus referendum to create $100,000 of funding a year for green initiatives at UC Berkeley, started a collective grocery store, and participated in tree sits." Rybkovich ( talk) 20:39, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply
re notability - Lothlorien holds theater performances: Activism plays role in student-run production of Bertolt Brecht’s plays Rybkovich ( talk) 01:46, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply
re notability - Some members consider Lothlorien to be haunted, Two female spirits haunt the co-op — both victims of domestic violence and fraught passion who died while living at Lothlorien years ago. Rybkovich ( talk) 01:46, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply
re notability - "UC Berkeley has a longstanding tradition of nude activism, stemming in large part from a push for sexual liberation on campus that occurred around the same time as the Free Speech Movement... At UC Berkeley, the practice of streaking to relieve finals stress has been traced back to Lothlorien House, a UC Berkeley co-op." Given the sources above I doubt this is a surprise given the character of house. Rybkovich ( talk) 01:56, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep, based on arguments above, mainly that it could be legitimately covered in the Berkeley Student Cooperative article, but it is too much to merge into that overstuffed article. I disagree with suggestion that it could be deleted but "If an article needs to be split (like List of Berkeley Student Cooperative properties or something), then we can always do that later." No, that would make the material inaccessible and would tend to violate Wikipedia's basic operating agreement with editors, that their work should be attributed. It would be okay by me for that list-article to be created, and this article redirected to a section about this place. Properly the merger edit should indicate credit owed to original authors of the article being merged. And the edit history would survive at what becomes a redirect. -- Doncram ( talk) 06:09, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply
    @ Doncram: I didn't comment suggesting deletion; I commented in favour of a redirect. You seem to be misunderstanding my statement. – MJL  ‐Talk‐ ☖ 03:05, 25 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. We are not RS, we defer to RS. Even if every single wikipedia contributor held the personal opinion this dorm wasn't notable, it appears some genuine reporters and editors disagreed, and covered it in the kind of detail required to measure up to GNG. When a topic measures up to GNG wikipedia contributor's personal opinions take a far second place. Geo Swan ( talk) 20:35, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply
    • Geo Swan, I would agree, if that were the case. However, which of the independent sources actually cover the dorm (not the co-operative) in-depth? The 2nd, 4th, 6th, and 11th are not independent sources; the 3rd is a blog, and not reliable; the 5th is about the co-op and only offers a brief mention of the dorm; the 7th and 8th are a mere mentions; the 9th and 10th don't even mention the dorm. And I don't even know what the 1st one is, I can't find any clue about Communities as a publication, or the author Ted Sterling. So, out of the 11 current sources, there is not a single one which is in-depth from an independent, reliable source. Onel5969 TT me 23:48, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply
      • onel5969 I'd be very interested in why you don't consider Lothlorien to be independent from The Daily Californian. There was a large student run cooperative housing corporation at two of the University's I attended. They were fiercely independent of the University administration, given that they raised the mortgages, and ran million dollar operations, independent of the University. The Daily Californian, its a student run paper? I didn't realize that, at first. All the student run newspapers I have ever come across, also fiercely independent. Since the newspaper and the coop housing federation are independent from the University aren't they independent from one another? Geo Swan ( talk) 01:53, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
        • Geo Swan, Because student newspapers are funded by the university. The co-operative is funded by the university. No matter how loudly the claims of "fiercely independent" they decry, they are inexorably linked, and hence cannot be considered independent. In addition, all you have to do is look at the content of student run newspapers, and the vast majority of that content is university related. Onel5969 TT me 03:00, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
          • Funded by the University? Are you sure? Up here College and University newspapers are paid for by student fees. Yes, the student federation has an agreement for the University to collect the fees, they then hand them over to the independent student federation.
          • There may be Universities in the United States where the administration controls the student newspaper. But Berkeley? Berkeley is well-known as one of the most radical campuses in the United States.
          • The Berkeley Student Cooperative article contains zero hints it is run by the University. bsc.coop also contains zero hints it is run by the University. All the houses are off campus - same as the coop housing at the Universities I attended. Geo Swan ( talk) 04:32, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
            • The first sentence of the main page of The Daily Californian https://www.dailycal.org/ says: "We're an independent, student-run newsroom."
onel5969, I have an essay User:Geo Swan/opinions/On apologies. I am not looking for an apology from you for insisting that The Daily Californian was not an independent organization. I do expect a clear acknowledgement that this claim was incorrect. Geo Swan ( talk) 13:58, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Geo Swan, entities can make any claim they wish to. The fact is they are funded by the school. What don't you understand about that? If they are funded by the school, they cannot, by definition, be independent. TCM magazine can claim they are independent of TCM, doesn't make the claim true. The paper receives a portion of it's funds from student fees through the university ($2.50 per student). In doing so, they can claim independence from the administration, but not from the university. Onel5969 TT me 14:07, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
    • By that logic, PBS and BBC are not independent since they receive funding from their respective governments. Where the money comes from is irrelevant, what matters is editorial control. I'm undecided on notability, but I'm not buying the argument that the paper isn't independent. Smartyllama ( talk) 15:24, 27 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Do you put any stock in the advice of WP:ATA? It has advice at WP:PAPERONLY that says "If offline sources, even exclusively offline sources, are used to reference an article, we give the creator (and other contributors) the benefit of the doubt in accepting their accuracy." Geo Swan ( talk) 02:54, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
And thanks for providing the link to Communities, which has no editorial oversight, and exists only as a promotional tool. So yes, I do put stock in non-online resources, and this one is not reliable. Onel5969 TT me 03:02, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
1. How does it not have editorial oversight? 2. Why would you think it's a "promotional tool"? 3. Lack of independent review does not classify it as unreliable. Rybkovich ( talk) 03:09, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • I too would be very interested in an explanations as to why you concluded there was no editorial oversight, and why you concluded it existed only as a promotional tool. Geo Swan ( talk) 05:26, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
    • Geo Swan, because the site which publishes it says that it exists for promotional purposes of its members. And in response to the comment down below, no matter how professional a blog is, it's still a blog. Onel5969 TT me 12:24, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
      • @ Onel5969: Really? Please substantiate this claim with a link. Please quote the passages you think substantiate your claim. Geo Swan ( talk) 13:22, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
onel5969 Independent source 1. It's a Magical Life by Ted Sterling 2. While it is a blog and there is a rule. The rule is not set in stone. I looked up the author on linked-in - he majored in architecture, and received an MBA in Sustainable Business, both degrees directly relate to the content of the post. He received his MBA in 2010 while the post was made in 2011. We can see that the post was done professionally - diagrams and reference, as well as how the relevant study was conducted. Also you can see that the blog was run for almost four years, and has multiple posts re the same topic, all done in the same high quality, professional manner. I know that these facts will not convince everyone that the author is a "subject matter expert", but its pretty clear that others will find the source reliable even if he is not SME. Re four directly related articles by DailyCal - Berkeley Student Cooperative is independent of the university, about half of its members are students but not at UC Berkeley. FYI while co-ops do technically fit the definition of a dormitory, they are not usually referred to as such. Per wiki article prisons also fit the definition of a dormitory :) Rybkovich ( talk) 03:09, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Also, the link to the article didn't work through my firefox, but it did through chrome. Also #2. The article is not complete in the link, but my friend is a librarian and sent me the complete article, if you want to read it I can send it to your email. Rybkovich ( talk) 03:19, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp ( talk) 11:33, 25 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per WP:TNT. Right now, it's filled with footnotes and tangents on lore and urban legends. Please fix this if you want to rescue this mess, and ping me when you're done. I would settle for a redirect. Bearian ( talk) 17:55, 26 January 2021 (UTC) reply
@ Bearian: I like your "footnotes and tangents lore and urban legends" rhyme, but we are not in a warehouse rap battle so no need for the attitude. You can keep up with the discussion by starring it. I see one "urban legend", which is listed as such so no need to pluralize. Tangents on lore are required because lore is what makes this house stand out. That is why its always one of the 30+ Berekeley Students Cooperatives houses mentioned in articles about the system. I believe and others will agree that the WP:GNG is met. I see that you're a lawyer, me too. So lets just keep to supporting our propositions as we continue the discussion. Rybkovich ( talk) 18:24, 26 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Bearian's invocation of wp:TNT as reason to delete is an admission that the topic is Wikipedia-notable plus a call to ignore Wikipedia's requirements for giving credit in edit history to editors. It should not be deleted only to be re-created. Please see wp:TNTTNT (to which I contributed) for expansion on these arguments. -- Doncram ( talk) 01:52, 28 January 2021 (UTC) reply
@ Doncram: I don't know what you're on about. If I write an article from scratch about topic A, and you write an article from scratch about Topic A; then that doesn't mean you have to credit me since none of my material was used. Not saying I agree with the delete and redirect approach nor the TNT approach here, but it is widely accepted valid outcome in general. – MJL  ‐Talk‐ ☖ 18:56, 28 January 2021 (UTC) reply
MJL, I see that the wp:TNTTNT essay had been modified, and had lost its upfront statement that arguing "TNT" is plainly "acknowledging the validity of the page's topic", and more, which I have just restored. Consensus of a good many editors about that essay, e.g. when it itself was nominated for deletion, is that indeed it is not right or good for us to delete one version of an article, only to replace it with your own, or to leave a hole where it is agreed that an article topic is valid. The bad practice, in cases when an original article was created and developed in good faith (as opposed to copyvios, say) should not be accepted. Discuss further at Wikipedia talk:TNTTNT. -- Doncram ( talk) 19:29, 28 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 12:26, 30 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep As per WP:HEY, article is well improved now. Cuoxo ( talk) 16:52, 30 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete I don't see significant coverage in independent sources. I'm not convinced that Communities is an independent source, and much of the rest of the article's sourcing fails WP:ORGIND.---- Pontificalibus 09:06, 9 February 2021 (UTC) reply
"much of the rest of the article's sourcing fails" thats a strong claim. How does it fail? Rybkovich ( talk) 19:20, 9 February 2021 (UTC) reply
It's either not independent, or it doesn't contain significant coverage, or otherwise doesn't meet WP:ORGCRIT. For example the most cited sources are [1] and [2], which are self-published. Strip out the non-independent sources and there are only passing mentions.---- Pontificalibus 14:24, 11 February 2021 (UTC) reply
@ Pontificalibus: Communities Magazine is an independent source, and both it and the specific article are available at universities' research journal collections see. Re "passing mentions", you can find articles specifically about lothlorien - here, here, and here. Berkeley Student Cooperative is non profit corporation independent of University of California, Berkeley. The Daily Californian is a non-profit California corporation independent of University of California, Berkeley. Given the above I don't see how the article fails any one of the WP:ORGCRIT primary criteria. Rybkovich ( talk) 17:41, 11 February 2021 (UTC) reply
WP:ORGCRIT states that a dependent source is "any material written or published, including websites, by the organization, its members, or sources closely associated with it, directly or indirectly" - a student newspaper serving one university is obviously closely associated with that university and its students, including any associated student accommodation buildings and organizations such as student cooperatives. It can be used as a source but not to establish the notability of an organization.
However, even if we're generous and agree that the UC Berkeley's Student newspaper is not even indirectly associated with UC Berkeley students and their accommodation we still don't find enough sources with sufficient in-depth independent coverage to satisfy WP:ORG:
  • Sterling, Ted (Spring 2001). "It's a magical life". Communities. 110: 41–44 – via ProQuest. Not independent - akin to a promotional trade publication
  • "Lothlorien | Berkeley Student Cooperative". www.bsc.coop. Archived from the original on 2020-11-26. Retrieved 2021-01-21.Not independent - this is the owner of the building
  • "The Daily Californian - Vegan, Vegetarian Students Find Berkeley Welcoming". 2006-02-23. Archived from the original on 2006-02-23. Retrieved 2021-01-26.One sentence, trivial fails WP:ORGDEPTH
  • "The Daily Californian - Increase in Food Costs Forces Co-Ops to Cut Meal Spending". archive.dailycal.org. Retrieved 2021-01-27.One sentence, trivial fails WP:ORGDEPTH
  • Staff, Sophia Weltman | (2014-03-03). "Activism plays role in student-run production of Bertolt Brecht's plays". The Daily Californian. Retrieved 2021-01-26.Trival, two mentions merely as a location
  • Kurata, Elizabeth; Smith, Conner (2016-04-29). "Demystifying the co-ops". The Daily Californian. Retrieved 2021-01-27.Fails WP:ORGIND - article states "it is also important to note that the writers are both BSC members"
  • "Lothlorien House - History of the Houses". 2007-10-06. Archived from the original on 2007-10-06. Retrieved 2021-01-21.Not a reliable source
  • Ginsburg, Marsha (1995-02-10). "Killer of Berkeley student "Bibi" Lee to be paroled". SFGATE. Retrieved 2021-01-26.Trivial mention
  • "People v. Page (1991)". Justia Law. Retrieved 2021-01-26.Primary source where mentioned in passing - cannot confer notability
  • "A real haunted house: the spirits of Lothlorien | The Daily Californian". 2016-08-14. Archived from the original on 2016-08-14. Retrieved 2021-01-27.Indirectly associated student paper fails WP:ORGIND
  • Staff, Michelle Pitcher | (2015-12-07). "The naked truth about the Naked Run". The Daily Californian. Retrieved 2021-01-24.Trivial mention
  • "Low-income students question whether UC Berkeley co-ops are living up to mission - SFChronicle.com". 2020-10-29. Archived from the original on 2020-10-29. Retrieved 2021-01-21.Trivial mention
  • "Drummond: UC Berkeley students feel the Bern". East Bay Times. 2016-02-10. Retrieved 2021-01-23.Trivial mention
  • Staff, Sareen Habeshian | (2016-10-31). "Campus students join protest efforts in North Dakota over proposed pipeline". The Daily Californian. Archived from the original on 2019-04-06. Retrieved 2021-01-23.Trivial mention
  • Alfred (2011-09-05). "It's a Co-op: Lothlorien & the limits of sustainability". It's a Co-op. Archived from the original on 2020-12-01. Retrieved 2021-01-21.Not mentioned
  • Jones, Carolyn (2007-12-02). "One year into protest, UC Berkeley's tree-sitters firmly planted". San Francisco Chronicle. Archived from the original on 2018-06-28. Retrieved 2021-01-23.Trivial mention
  • "Four Remaining Tree-Sitters Leave UC Berkeley Oak Grove". The Daily Californian. Archived from the original on 2016-01-21. Retrieved 2021-01-23.Not mentioned
  • "Solar Photovoltaic - Sustainability". sites.google.com. Retrieved 2021-01-27.Trivial mention- also not a reliable source
Currently the sourcing falls short of what is required to establish notability.---- Pontificalibus 19:00, 11 February 2021 (UTC) reply
Yes there are sources in the article which would not independently establish notability. Thank you for listing them.
Re Community, yes its about communities like lothlorien, and yes it targets a specific group of readers and organizations, but that dose not make it solely a "promotional trade publication". Research libraries have them part of their catalogues, the journal would not be there if it was a "promotional trade publication".
Re "absolutely closely associated". Because Daily Cal and Lothlorien are made of students in the same geographic location? Under your definition small town newspapers would not be able to establish notability.
Per WP:IS "An independent source is a source that has no vested interest in a given Wikipedia topic and therefore is commonly expected to cover the topic from a disinterested perspective. Independent sources have editorial independence (advertisers do not dictate content) and no conflicts of interest (there is no potential for personal, financial, or political gain to be made from the existence of the publication)." Can you please leave a list of the vested interests Daily Cal has in publishing articles about Lothlorien. Rybkovich ( talk) 23:30, 11 February 2021 (UTC) reply
As I said, even if you think that the Berkeley student newspaper writing about Berkeley student accommodation is acceptable in establishing notability, these sources additionally fail to meet the other requirements necessary to establish notability. The only Daily Californian article which isn't either a mere passing mention or has an explicitly declared conflict of interest is the one about ghosts. Aside from that the only in-depth article not published by the cooperative themselves is the Communities article. Even if you thought that wasn't promotional, these two sources alone are still insufficient to satisfy WP:AUD - there are no regional or non-specialist sources.-- Pontificalibus 08:35, 12 February 2021 (UTC) reply
You're ignoring the political theater article, which is centered on one of the main themes of the community which is the combination of art and politics. Rybkovich ( talk) 20:10, 12 February 2021 (UTC) reply
re WP:AUD, Community is considered academic as it is held at higher education libraries all over US, the requirement that it can't be "media of limited interest" does not exclude journals on specific academic and/or cultural topics. Rybkovich ( talk) 07:22, 13 February 2021 (UTC) reply
I found a detailed description, it is not academic but what makes sense is that academic research libraries have them as a cultural anthropology source for communal living cultures. It is not a promotional trade publication. From the description:
We see Communities: Life in Cooperative Culture as a guidebook for that changing world—one that will help us find ways to live together more effectively in a new age in which we cannot ignore or escape the feedback loops, the effects of our actions and choices on the planet and on one another. If any doubt remained that we are living in an age of koyaanisqatsi (“unbalanced life” in Hopi), this past year of pandemic, racial disparity laid bare, climate chaos, threats to democratic institutions, and much more has eliminated illusions about that. And at the same time, if those of us involved in intentional community and other manifestations of cooperative culture ever doubted that our choices held value and long-term relevance and applicability for our larger world, 2020 has also eliminated our questions about that. Sharing the examples, lessons, stories, visions, practical guidance, and insights emerging from experiments in creating cooperative, regenerative culture in a world that sorely needs it has never seemed more important or urgent than it is today. Rybkovich ( talk) 15:56, 13 February 2021 (UTC) reply
Yes a very niche limited audience per WP:AUD: "...attention solely from local media, or media of limited interest and circulation, is not an indication of notability; at least one regional, statewide, provincial, national, or international source is necessary" (my bold). No such source is apparent, therefore this fails WP:ORG.---- Pontificalibus 14:03, 19 February 2021 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HistoricalAccountings ( talk) 16:00, 9 February 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to the student cooperative article. Being vegan is neither here nor there and this largely seems like a puff-piece. Oaktree b ( talk) 02:30, 11 February 2021 (UTC) reply
@ Oaktree b: Is your opinion that its a puffer piece because it describes one of the social rules of the house? Rybkovich ( talk) 15:35, 11 February 2021 (UTC) reply
A traditional fraternity or sorority or college dorm or college-associated house being vegan is a pretty dramatic fact worth noting. Maybe Oaktree b considers it to be a trivial fact, but from my experience it is quite a big deal and conveys a lot about the social nature, the composition of any such place. Hmm, actually the place is not vegan; the article states "Many residents of Lothlorien are vegetarians and vegans, but ...", which is likewise informative in a big way. I !voted "Keep" above, and i think this is ready to be closed "Keep", too. -- Doncram ( talk) 19:23, 17 February 2021 (UTC) reply
@ Lil-unique1: The last 90 days is not a good indicator, the page was taken off redirect less than a month ago. Describing a page that someone's put a lot of work into as "fringe" or "weak" that's not nice :( A great editor from the UK once said "If you are uncivil you might want to take a break because honestly? It's not worth it, there is so much more going on in life." Rybkovich ( talk) 01:26, 19 February 2021 (UTC) reply
@ Rybkovich: I was describing the subject not the article as fringe. It is of limited appeal to the a wide audience. When I look at deletion discussions I ask myself two questions "1. is the content notable and reliably sourced?, 2. Where would someone feasibly best access the information best?". If you cannot accept feedback on your work then community-based mediums like Wikipedia might not the best place for you because no article, no matter how much someone has worked on it, no article belongs to any editor. It is not personal - you shouldn't see the decision/or others wanting to redirect an article as a personal attack on either you, your personality, your abilities or your determination/hard work. We can see from the discussion that you are passionate about the topic/subject and your work but the loudest voice doesn't necessarily win. This is a discussion and it won't be solved by repeatedly making the same point. Also just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean you shouldn't assume good faith. My contribution to this discussion has no malice and does not from a procedural or ethical point of view have anything negative towards you as a person, editor, or your work. It is simply my view that the topic is not noteworthy for a standalone article. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 11:31, 19 February 2021 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more relist might be useful, as this is very much in No Consensus territory at the moment
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Black Kite (talk) 22:21, 19 February 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to Berkeley Student Cooperative. I accept that The Daily Californian is independent from the University of California, Berkeley financially and editorially, but it is not independent for purposes of conveying notability. As a student newspaper at a university, the Daily Cal can be expected to cover aspects of student life at the university which would not necessarily be of note to persons not affiliated with the university, and thus doesn't convey notability to student-related things at the university. I've been espousing this position on Wikipedia for many years. Most of the non-Daily Cal sources cited are incidental or unreliable. And while there's no doubt that students at Berkeley may be looking for information about housing where they may want to live on or near the campus, I would expect the Berkeley Student Cooperative, and other entities which are more- or less-connected with the university, to publish web sites about the various housing options that are available. It's not the task of an encyclopedia to serve as a housing guide. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:16, 20 February 2021 (UTC) reply
@ Metropolitan90: I agree to disagree. Being a housing option is one of the reasons that the article can be used for, but not sole or central. Lothlorian stands out among other cooperative living communities. It has unusual and permanent cultural characteristics that persist even though it's group of residents is constantly changing. If you search ProQuest (its publisher) journal database for Communities Magazine 6 different articles come up. One of them is solely about the house and its culture. Communities Magazine should be considered as a respected source in the field as academic research libraries carry it. Rybkovich ( talk) 03:36, 20 February 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to Berkeley Student Cooperative. After reading over the discussion the only thing I can determine is that The Daily Californian is the only possibly usable source. I don't think it works on it's own though. As notability requires multiple sources, that also have to be regional or national. Not in the same location of the subject. Plus, it's independence is questionable. Although, maybe that could be disregarded, but the fact that it's local and only a single source can't be. Come up with one (really it should be two) good national or even regional, but preferably national, source (more like sources) that is independent and in-depth, and I'd be more then willing to change my vote. In the meantime though, there's zero wrong with redirecting this as an alternative to deletion. -- Adamant1 ( talk) 04:00, 26 February 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect with a selective merge to Berkeley Student Cooperative as suggested. Bearian ( talk) 14:23, 26 February 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to the suggested target. The sourcing just isn't quite there for the reasons discussed above, mostly by Metropolitan90, which I agree with, so I can't support keeping this. SportingFlyer T· C 02:23, 1 March 2021 (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.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Lothlorien_Hall_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=1010288753"
From 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 redirect to Berkeley Student Cooperative. Spartaz Humbug! 18:54, 4 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Lothlorien Hall

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Lothlorien Hall (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

While the co-operative of which it is a part is notable, this small dorm-like building (less than 60 students) is not notable by itself. Searches are difficult due to the Tolkien-themed name (don't know if that is why it was named such, but it is what makes searching difficult), but not nearly enough in-depth coverage from independent, secondary sources to pass WP:GNG. Current sources include two primary sources, one blog, and one nice article. But the article is about the co-operative, not the house, although it is mentioned briefly in the article. Onel5969 TT me 12:58, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 13:11, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 13:11, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply
I disagree WP:NPLACE - "Bars, pubs, cafes, restaurants, and hotels tend not to survive AfD unless multiple independent sources have written about them in non-trivial detail." The notable particularities of this place have elicited multiple independent queries. The examples below are from culture anthropological and urban development fields:
    • Cultural anthropology: "My three years at Lothlorien had convinced me without any doubt that I wanted to live in community for the rest of my life, and that my ideal community would look and feel a lot like Lothlorien. The house is an oasis in Berkeley's otherwise vast and impersonal student setting, where high turnover is endemic... Where many student co-ops struggle to create a lasting identity, Lothlorien succeeds, persisting as an entity unto itself, where the whole is far greater than the sum of its parts." Sterling, Ted. Foundation For Intentional Community; Rutledge Iss. 110, (Spring 2001): 41-44.
    • Urban development: "As the sole vegetarian house in the 1300 member Berkeley Student Cooperative (BSC), Lothlorien became the de facto eco-theme house... utility bills, while low, were not always at the per capita bottom among the 20 BSC co-ops. A look at Lothlorien offers some insights on the unique challenges that co-ops face in environmental performance... Presently Lothlorien uses 125 kWh of electricity per day, just over 2 kWh per person... Solar panels were installed on the roof of South House in 2010. Occupying 3/4 of the roof (the rest is used for solar hot water), these panels produce nearly all of the electricity needed during summer afternoon peak hours when rates are 300% higher than normal... it’s easy to romanticize its image as one of perfection. In actuality greater heights in co-opitecture can be achieved." Lothlorien & the limits of sustainability Note the multiple architectural and engineering diagrams.
  • Delete The Berkeley Student Cooperative is notable, this house is not. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 15:12, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply
    • @ Johnpacklambert: I disagree. Please note the two article I cite in response to Cupper52. One states that "As the sole vegetarian house in the 1300 member Berkeley Student Cooperative (BSC), Lothlorien became the de facto eco-theme house. Elves, as residents of Lothlorien are called, are prominent at the forefront of the green movement" wile the other states that "Where many student co-ops struggle to create a lasting identity, Lothlorien succeeds, persisting as an entity unto itself, where the whole is far greater than the sum of its parts." Rybkovich ( talk) 23:58, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect. If "Lothlorien Hall" is something someone could meaningfully look up on Wikipedia, then it is probably a decent search term that should lead to Berkeley Student Cooperative. – MJL  ‐Talk‐ ☖ 16:06, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Context, this is important info to consider: Affordable housing is a rarity for large universities in big cities. A one bedroom apartment close to UC Berkeley is approximately $2k a month. Berkeley students are fortunate to have an affordable option - Berkeley Student Cooperative (BSC), the largest co-op system in the USA, where food and board are $7,500 per semester. The system can house approx 1,300 students, there is a waiting list to become a member. Getting info about the co-ops is essential. If you go to the BSC page you will see that it is almost impossible to navigate. Different houses have different reputation and character, there is interesting history and specific culture for several halls - BSC is not a just a collection of nearly identical dormitories. Unfortunately, info regarding the distinct halls makes the BSC page very confusing and requires a great effort to find what one is looking for. My project is to trim the huge BSC article and create individual pages for the standout halls that now have large subsections. There is additional relevant info about the particular houses which will make the BSC article even worse if inserted into individual subsections.
Info regarding the stand out houses is really important for the students: Consider two houses Cloyne Court Hotel and Casa Zimbabwe, both have their own character with important differences. For example: Cloyne is a sober house, no drugs or alcohol allowed. If we look at the stats we can see that there are a lot of people looking for this info. If you examine the stats for 2019 (2020 would not be a good example). Casa Zimbabwe had 3,463 views, Cloyne had 2,713.
Out of all the houses, Lothlorien stands out the most. Yet at the same time it is considered a representative of the whole BSC system. It very well fits the hippy stereotype that some still associate with this university and its students. Its a very close community, you can't have meat inside the house, there are gardens and tree houses, and to some extent the community has its own diction and vocabulary. Take a guess on which house was the origin of the nude run through Berkeley libraries at the end of each semester? ;) For the past several years it has been one of the focal points of political activity in the USA. All of the above is essential info for both students making housing decisions (a house full of revolutionaries making phone calls 24 hours a day may not be enticing) and important for those interested in whats going on Berkeley. The article you are looking at right now is the info taken out of a BSC subsection. I'm currently expanding it. There is a lot of historical info in newspaper archives that I'm going through and relevant architectural info (historically and environmentally) that I will be adding. The problem with working on it and expanding the info within the Berkeley Student Cooperative article is that it would be making it even more confusing, which is exactly the opposite of what needs to be done. @ Johnpacklambert:, @ Cupper52:, @ Shellwood:, I'm pinging you just in case. Rybkovich ( talk) 18:52, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply
    • That above demonstrates that BCS is notable, it in no way persuades me that this particular house is notable. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 19:02, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply
      • Johnpacklambert, exactly, which is what I said in the nom. Onel5969 TT me 19:12, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply
        • I disagree that "a very close community, you can't have meat inside the house, there are gardens and tree houses, and to some extent the community HAS ITS OWN DICTION AND VOCABULARY" is not notable info (in addition there are murals running a long the sides of the house that would be presented in a gallery). I can't think of any dorm buildings like that. Also have you considered it as solution to the very serious problem with the BSC article? Please consider the view stats, there is distinctive information that students are basing their decisions on, which is very hard to get to if its retained within the Berkeley Student Cooperative article. Approx 3,000 annual views for each house is not an irrelevant factor. Rybkovich ( talk) 19:19, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply
re notability - "While having house members indirectly committed to a theme does not inevitably produce tension, intra-house dynamics are are highly variable semester to semester. For example, Lothlorien, the vegan/vegetarian-themed house, has also become known as a space of political activism. Lothlorien resident Iman Kazah said, “It took me a long time to learn a certain dialect in Loth,” a house where the culture encourages speaking in a specific rhetoric as to best engender inclusivity". I think that having a co-op house that is closer to being a commune than a dormitory is notable. Rybkovich ( talk) 20:39, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply
re notability - "As the sole vegetarian house in the 1300 member Berkeley Student Cooperative (BSC), Lothlorien became the de facto eco-theme house. Elves, as residents of Lothlorien are called, are prominent at the forefront of the green movement - just in my four years there, we passed a campus referendum to create $100,000 of funding a year for green initiatives at UC Berkeley, started a collective grocery store, and participated in tree sits." Rybkovich ( talk) 20:39, 22 January 2021 (UTC) reply
re notability - Lothlorien holds theater performances: Activism plays role in student-run production of Bertolt Brecht’s plays Rybkovich ( talk) 01:46, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply
re notability - Some members consider Lothlorien to be haunted, Two female spirits haunt the co-op — both victims of domestic violence and fraught passion who died while living at Lothlorien years ago. Rybkovich ( talk) 01:46, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply
re notability - "UC Berkeley has a longstanding tradition of nude activism, stemming in large part from a push for sexual liberation on campus that occurred around the same time as the Free Speech Movement... At UC Berkeley, the practice of streaking to relieve finals stress has been traced back to Lothlorien House, a UC Berkeley co-op." Given the sources above I doubt this is a surprise given the character of house. Rybkovich ( talk) 01:56, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep, based on arguments above, mainly that it could be legitimately covered in the Berkeley Student Cooperative article, but it is too much to merge into that overstuffed article. I disagree with suggestion that it could be deleted but "If an article needs to be split (like List of Berkeley Student Cooperative properties or something), then we can always do that later." No, that would make the material inaccessible and would tend to violate Wikipedia's basic operating agreement with editors, that their work should be attributed. It would be okay by me for that list-article to be created, and this article redirected to a section about this place. Properly the merger edit should indicate credit owed to original authors of the article being merged. And the edit history would survive at what becomes a redirect. -- Doncram ( talk) 06:09, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply
    @ Doncram: I didn't comment suggesting deletion; I commented in favour of a redirect. You seem to be misunderstanding my statement. – MJL  ‐Talk‐ ☖ 03:05, 25 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. We are not RS, we defer to RS. Even if every single wikipedia contributor held the personal opinion this dorm wasn't notable, it appears some genuine reporters and editors disagreed, and covered it in the kind of detail required to measure up to GNG. When a topic measures up to GNG wikipedia contributor's personal opinions take a far second place. Geo Swan ( talk) 20:35, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply
    • Geo Swan, I would agree, if that were the case. However, which of the independent sources actually cover the dorm (not the co-operative) in-depth? The 2nd, 4th, 6th, and 11th are not independent sources; the 3rd is a blog, and not reliable; the 5th is about the co-op and only offers a brief mention of the dorm; the 7th and 8th are a mere mentions; the 9th and 10th don't even mention the dorm. And I don't even know what the 1st one is, I can't find any clue about Communities as a publication, or the author Ted Sterling. So, out of the 11 current sources, there is not a single one which is in-depth from an independent, reliable source. Onel5969 TT me 23:48, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply
      • onel5969 I'd be very interested in why you don't consider Lothlorien to be independent from The Daily Californian. There was a large student run cooperative housing corporation at two of the University's I attended. They were fiercely independent of the University administration, given that they raised the mortgages, and ran million dollar operations, independent of the University. The Daily Californian, its a student run paper? I didn't realize that, at first. All the student run newspapers I have ever come across, also fiercely independent. Since the newspaper and the coop housing federation are independent from the University aren't they independent from one another? Geo Swan ( talk) 01:53, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
        • Geo Swan, Because student newspapers are funded by the university. The co-operative is funded by the university. No matter how loudly the claims of "fiercely independent" they decry, they are inexorably linked, and hence cannot be considered independent. In addition, all you have to do is look at the content of student run newspapers, and the vast majority of that content is university related. Onel5969 TT me 03:00, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
          • Funded by the University? Are you sure? Up here College and University newspapers are paid for by student fees. Yes, the student federation has an agreement for the University to collect the fees, they then hand them over to the independent student federation.
          • There may be Universities in the United States where the administration controls the student newspaper. But Berkeley? Berkeley is well-known as one of the most radical campuses in the United States.
          • The Berkeley Student Cooperative article contains zero hints it is run by the University. bsc.coop also contains zero hints it is run by the University. All the houses are off campus - same as the coop housing at the Universities I attended. Geo Swan ( talk) 04:32, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
            • The first sentence of the main page of The Daily Californian https://www.dailycal.org/ says: "We're an independent, student-run newsroom."
onel5969, I have an essay User:Geo Swan/opinions/On apologies. I am not looking for an apology from you for insisting that The Daily Californian was not an independent organization. I do expect a clear acknowledgement that this claim was incorrect. Geo Swan ( talk) 13:58, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Geo Swan, entities can make any claim they wish to. The fact is they are funded by the school. What don't you understand about that? If they are funded by the school, they cannot, by definition, be independent. TCM magazine can claim they are independent of TCM, doesn't make the claim true. The paper receives a portion of it's funds from student fees through the university ($2.50 per student). In doing so, they can claim independence from the administration, but not from the university. Onel5969 TT me 14:07, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
    • By that logic, PBS and BBC are not independent since they receive funding from their respective governments. Where the money comes from is irrelevant, what matters is editorial control. I'm undecided on notability, but I'm not buying the argument that the paper isn't independent. Smartyllama ( talk) 15:24, 27 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Do you put any stock in the advice of WP:ATA? It has advice at WP:PAPERONLY that says "If offline sources, even exclusively offline sources, are used to reference an article, we give the creator (and other contributors) the benefit of the doubt in accepting their accuracy." Geo Swan ( talk) 02:54, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
And thanks for providing the link to Communities, which has no editorial oversight, and exists only as a promotional tool. So yes, I do put stock in non-online resources, and this one is not reliable. Onel5969 TT me 03:02, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
1. How does it not have editorial oversight? 2. Why would you think it's a "promotional tool"? 3. Lack of independent review does not classify it as unreliable. Rybkovich ( talk) 03:09, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • I too would be very interested in an explanations as to why you concluded there was no editorial oversight, and why you concluded it existed only as a promotional tool. Geo Swan ( talk) 05:26, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
    • Geo Swan, because the site which publishes it says that it exists for promotional purposes of its members. And in response to the comment down below, no matter how professional a blog is, it's still a blog. Onel5969 TT me 12:24, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
      • @ Onel5969: Really? Please substantiate this claim with a link. Please quote the passages you think substantiate your claim. Geo Swan ( talk) 13:22, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
onel5969 Independent source 1. It's a Magical Life by Ted Sterling 2. While it is a blog and there is a rule. The rule is not set in stone. I looked up the author on linked-in - he majored in architecture, and received an MBA in Sustainable Business, both degrees directly relate to the content of the post. He received his MBA in 2010 while the post was made in 2011. We can see that the post was done professionally - diagrams and reference, as well as how the relevant study was conducted. Also you can see that the blog was run for almost four years, and has multiple posts re the same topic, all done in the same high quality, professional manner. I know that these facts will not convince everyone that the author is a "subject matter expert", but its pretty clear that others will find the source reliable even if he is not SME. Re four directly related articles by DailyCal - Berkeley Student Cooperative is independent of the university, about half of its members are students but not at UC Berkeley. FYI while co-ops do technically fit the definition of a dormitory, they are not usually referred to as such. Per wiki article prisons also fit the definition of a dormitory :) Rybkovich ( talk) 03:09, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Also, the link to the article didn't work through my firefox, but it did through chrome. Also #2. The article is not complete in the link, but my friend is a librarian and sent me the complete article, if you want to read it I can send it to your email. Rybkovich ( talk) 03:19, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp ( talk) 11:33, 25 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per WP:TNT. Right now, it's filled with footnotes and tangents on lore and urban legends. Please fix this if you want to rescue this mess, and ping me when you're done. I would settle for a redirect. Bearian ( talk) 17:55, 26 January 2021 (UTC) reply
@ Bearian: I like your "footnotes and tangents lore and urban legends" rhyme, but we are not in a warehouse rap battle so no need for the attitude. You can keep up with the discussion by starring it. I see one "urban legend", which is listed as such so no need to pluralize. Tangents on lore are required because lore is what makes this house stand out. That is why its always one of the 30+ Berekeley Students Cooperatives houses mentioned in articles about the system. I believe and others will agree that the WP:GNG is met. I see that you're a lawyer, me too. So lets just keep to supporting our propositions as we continue the discussion. Rybkovich ( talk) 18:24, 26 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Bearian's invocation of wp:TNT as reason to delete is an admission that the topic is Wikipedia-notable plus a call to ignore Wikipedia's requirements for giving credit in edit history to editors. It should not be deleted only to be re-created. Please see wp:TNTTNT (to which I contributed) for expansion on these arguments. -- Doncram ( talk) 01:52, 28 January 2021 (UTC) reply
@ Doncram: I don't know what you're on about. If I write an article from scratch about topic A, and you write an article from scratch about Topic A; then that doesn't mean you have to credit me since none of my material was used. Not saying I agree with the delete and redirect approach nor the TNT approach here, but it is widely accepted valid outcome in general. – MJL  ‐Talk‐ ☖ 18:56, 28 January 2021 (UTC) reply
MJL, I see that the wp:TNTTNT essay had been modified, and had lost its upfront statement that arguing "TNT" is plainly "acknowledging the validity of the page's topic", and more, which I have just restored. Consensus of a good many editors about that essay, e.g. when it itself was nominated for deletion, is that indeed it is not right or good for us to delete one version of an article, only to replace it with your own, or to leave a hole where it is agreed that an article topic is valid. The bad practice, in cases when an original article was created and developed in good faith (as opposed to copyvios, say) should not be accepted. Discuss further at Wikipedia talk:TNTTNT. -- Doncram ( talk) 19:29, 28 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 12:26, 30 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep As per WP:HEY, article is well improved now. Cuoxo ( talk) 16:52, 30 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete I don't see significant coverage in independent sources. I'm not convinced that Communities is an independent source, and much of the rest of the article's sourcing fails WP:ORGIND.---- Pontificalibus 09:06, 9 February 2021 (UTC) reply
"much of the rest of the article's sourcing fails" thats a strong claim. How does it fail? Rybkovich ( talk) 19:20, 9 February 2021 (UTC) reply
It's either not independent, or it doesn't contain significant coverage, or otherwise doesn't meet WP:ORGCRIT. For example the most cited sources are [1] and [2], which are self-published. Strip out the non-independent sources and there are only passing mentions.---- Pontificalibus 14:24, 11 February 2021 (UTC) reply
@ Pontificalibus: Communities Magazine is an independent source, and both it and the specific article are available at universities' research journal collections see. Re "passing mentions", you can find articles specifically about lothlorien - here, here, and here. Berkeley Student Cooperative is non profit corporation independent of University of California, Berkeley. The Daily Californian is a non-profit California corporation independent of University of California, Berkeley. Given the above I don't see how the article fails any one of the WP:ORGCRIT primary criteria. Rybkovich ( talk) 17:41, 11 February 2021 (UTC) reply
WP:ORGCRIT states that a dependent source is "any material written or published, including websites, by the organization, its members, or sources closely associated with it, directly or indirectly" - a student newspaper serving one university is obviously closely associated with that university and its students, including any associated student accommodation buildings and organizations such as student cooperatives. It can be used as a source but not to establish the notability of an organization.
However, even if we're generous and agree that the UC Berkeley's Student newspaper is not even indirectly associated with UC Berkeley students and their accommodation we still don't find enough sources with sufficient in-depth independent coverage to satisfy WP:ORG:
  • Sterling, Ted (Spring 2001). "It's a magical life". Communities. 110: 41–44 – via ProQuest. Not independent - akin to a promotional trade publication
  • "Lothlorien | Berkeley Student Cooperative". www.bsc.coop. Archived from the original on 2020-11-26. Retrieved 2021-01-21.Not independent - this is the owner of the building
  • "The Daily Californian - Vegan, Vegetarian Students Find Berkeley Welcoming". 2006-02-23. Archived from the original on 2006-02-23. Retrieved 2021-01-26.One sentence, trivial fails WP:ORGDEPTH
  • "The Daily Californian - Increase in Food Costs Forces Co-Ops to Cut Meal Spending". archive.dailycal.org. Retrieved 2021-01-27.One sentence, trivial fails WP:ORGDEPTH
  • Staff, Sophia Weltman | (2014-03-03). "Activism plays role in student-run production of Bertolt Brecht's plays". The Daily Californian. Retrieved 2021-01-26.Trival, two mentions merely as a location
  • Kurata, Elizabeth; Smith, Conner (2016-04-29). "Demystifying the co-ops". The Daily Californian. Retrieved 2021-01-27.Fails WP:ORGIND - article states "it is also important to note that the writers are both BSC members"
  • "Lothlorien House - History of the Houses". 2007-10-06. Archived from the original on 2007-10-06. Retrieved 2021-01-21.Not a reliable source
  • Ginsburg, Marsha (1995-02-10). "Killer of Berkeley student "Bibi" Lee to be paroled". SFGATE. Retrieved 2021-01-26.Trivial mention
  • "People v. Page (1991)". Justia Law. Retrieved 2021-01-26.Primary source where mentioned in passing - cannot confer notability
  • "A real haunted house: the spirits of Lothlorien | The Daily Californian". 2016-08-14. Archived from the original on 2016-08-14. Retrieved 2021-01-27.Indirectly associated student paper fails WP:ORGIND
  • Staff, Michelle Pitcher | (2015-12-07). "The naked truth about the Naked Run". The Daily Californian. Retrieved 2021-01-24.Trivial mention
  • "Low-income students question whether UC Berkeley co-ops are living up to mission - SFChronicle.com". 2020-10-29. Archived from the original on 2020-10-29. Retrieved 2021-01-21.Trivial mention
  • "Drummond: UC Berkeley students feel the Bern". East Bay Times. 2016-02-10. Retrieved 2021-01-23.Trivial mention
  • Staff, Sareen Habeshian | (2016-10-31). "Campus students join protest efforts in North Dakota over proposed pipeline". The Daily Californian. Archived from the original on 2019-04-06. Retrieved 2021-01-23.Trivial mention
  • Alfred (2011-09-05). "It's a Co-op: Lothlorien & the limits of sustainability". It's a Co-op. Archived from the original on 2020-12-01. Retrieved 2021-01-21.Not mentioned
  • Jones, Carolyn (2007-12-02). "One year into protest, UC Berkeley's tree-sitters firmly planted". San Francisco Chronicle. Archived from the original on 2018-06-28. Retrieved 2021-01-23.Trivial mention
  • "Four Remaining Tree-Sitters Leave UC Berkeley Oak Grove". The Daily Californian. Archived from the original on 2016-01-21. Retrieved 2021-01-23.Not mentioned
  • "Solar Photovoltaic - Sustainability". sites.google.com. Retrieved 2021-01-27.Trivial mention- also not a reliable source
Currently the sourcing falls short of what is required to establish notability.---- Pontificalibus 19:00, 11 February 2021 (UTC) reply
Yes there are sources in the article which would not independently establish notability. Thank you for listing them.
Re Community, yes its about communities like lothlorien, and yes it targets a specific group of readers and organizations, but that dose not make it solely a "promotional trade publication". Research libraries have them part of their catalogues, the journal would not be there if it was a "promotional trade publication".
Re "absolutely closely associated". Because Daily Cal and Lothlorien are made of students in the same geographic location? Under your definition small town newspapers would not be able to establish notability.
Per WP:IS "An independent source is a source that has no vested interest in a given Wikipedia topic and therefore is commonly expected to cover the topic from a disinterested perspective. Independent sources have editorial independence (advertisers do not dictate content) and no conflicts of interest (there is no potential for personal, financial, or political gain to be made from the existence of the publication)." Can you please leave a list of the vested interests Daily Cal has in publishing articles about Lothlorien. Rybkovich ( talk) 23:30, 11 February 2021 (UTC) reply
As I said, even if you think that the Berkeley student newspaper writing about Berkeley student accommodation is acceptable in establishing notability, these sources additionally fail to meet the other requirements necessary to establish notability. The only Daily Californian article which isn't either a mere passing mention or has an explicitly declared conflict of interest is the one about ghosts. Aside from that the only in-depth article not published by the cooperative themselves is the Communities article. Even if you thought that wasn't promotional, these two sources alone are still insufficient to satisfy WP:AUD - there are no regional or non-specialist sources.-- Pontificalibus 08:35, 12 February 2021 (UTC) reply
You're ignoring the political theater article, which is centered on one of the main themes of the community which is the combination of art and politics. Rybkovich ( talk) 20:10, 12 February 2021 (UTC) reply
re WP:AUD, Community is considered academic as it is held at higher education libraries all over US, the requirement that it can't be "media of limited interest" does not exclude journals on specific academic and/or cultural topics. Rybkovich ( talk) 07:22, 13 February 2021 (UTC) reply
I found a detailed description, it is not academic but what makes sense is that academic research libraries have them as a cultural anthropology source for communal living cultures. It is not a promotional trade publication. From the description:
We see Communities: Life in Cooperative Culture as a guidebook for that changing world—one that will help us find ways to live together more effectively in a new age in which we cannot ignore or escape the feedback loops, the effects of our actions and choices on the planet and on one another. If any doubt remained that we are living in an age of koyaanisqatsi (“unbalanced life” in Hopi), this past year of pandemic, racial disparity laid bare, climate chaos, threats to democratic institutions, and much more has eliminated illusions about that. And at the same time, if those of us involved in intentional community and other manifestations of cooperative culture ever doubted that our choices held value and long-term relevance and applicability for our larger world, 2020 has also eliminated our questions about that. Sharing the examples, lessons, stories, visions, practical guidance, and insights emerging from experiments in creating cooperative, regenerative culture in a world that sorely needs it has never seemed more important or urgent than it is today. Rybkovich ( talk) 15:56, 13 February 2021 (UTC) reply
Yes a very niche limited audience per WP:AUD: "...attention solely from local media, or media of limited interest and circulation, is not an indication of notability; at least one regional, statewide, provincial, national, or international source is necessary" (my bold). No such source is apparent, therefore this fails WP:ORG.---- Pontificalibus 14:03, 19 February 2021 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HistoricalAccountings ( talk) 16:00, 9 February 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to the student cooperative article. Being vegan is neither here nor there and this largely seems like a puff-piece. Oaktree b ( talk) 02:30, 11 February 2021 (UTC) reply
@ Oaktree b: Is your opinion that its a puffer piece because it describes one of the social rules of the house? Rybkovich ( talk) 15:35, 11 February 2021 (UTC) reply
A traditional fraternity or sorority or college dorm or college-associated house being vegan is a pretty dramatic fact worth noting. Maybe Oaktree b considers it to be a trivial fact, but from my experience it is quite a big deal and conveys a lot about the social nature, the composition of any such place. Hmm, actually the place is not vegan; the article states "Many residents of Lothlorien are vegetarians and vegans, but ...", which is likewise informative in a big way. I !voted "Keep" above, and i think this is ready to be closed "Keep", too. -- Doncram ( talk) 19:23, 17 February 2021 (UTC) reply
@ Lil-unique1: The last 90 days is not a good indicator, the page was taken off redirect less than a month ago. Describing a page that someone's put a lot of work into as "fringe" or "weak" that's not nice :( A great editor from the UK once said "If you are uncivil you might want to take a break because honestly? It's not worth it, there is so much more going on in life." Rybkovich ( talk) 01:26, 19 February 2021 (UTC) reply
@ Rybkovich: I was describing the subject not the article as fringe. It is of limited appeal to the a wide audience. When I look at deletion discussions I ask myself two questions "1. is the content notable and reliably sourced?, 2. Where would someone feasibly best access the information best?". If you cannot accept feedback on your work then community-based mediums like Wikipedia might not the best place for you because no article, no matter how much someone has worked on it, no article belongs to any editor. It is not personal - you shouldn't see the decision/or others wanting to redirect an article as a personal attack on either you, your personality, your abilities or your determination/hard work. We can see from the discussion that you are passionate about the topic/subject and your work but the loudest voice doesn't necessarily win. This is a discussion and it won't be solved by repeatedly making the same point. Also just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean you shouldn't assume good faith. My contribution to this discussion has no malice and does not from a procedural or ethical point of view have anything negative towards you as a person, editor, or your work. It is simply my view that the topic is not noteworthy for a standalone article. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 11:31, 19 February 2021 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more relist might be useful, as this is very much in No Consensus territory at the moment
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Black Kite (talk) 22:21, 19 February 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to Berkeley Student Cooperative. I accept that The Daily Californian is independent from the University of California, Berkeley financially and editorially, but it is not independent for purposes of conveying notability. As a student newspaper at a university, the Daily Cal can be expected to cover aspects of student life at the university which would not necessarily be of note to persons not affiliated with the university, and thus doesn't convey notability to student-related things at the university. I've been espousing this position on Wikipedia for many years. Most of the non-Daily Cal sources cited are incidental or unreliable. And while there's no doubt that students at Berkeley may be looking for information about housing where they may want to live on or near the campus, I would expect the Berkeley Student Cooperative, and other entities which are more- or less-connected with the university, to publish web sites about the various housing options that are available. It's not the task of an encyclopedia to serve as a housing guide. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:16, 20 February 2021 (UTC) reply
@ Metropolitan90: I agree to disagree. Being a housing option is one of the reasons that the article can be used for, but not sole or central. Lothlorian stands out among other cooperative living communities. It has unusual and permanent cultural characteristics that persist even though it's group of residents is constantly changing. If you search ProQuest (its publisher) journal database for Communities Magazine 6 different articles come up. One of them is solely about the house and its culture. Communities Magazine should be considered as a respected source in the field as academic research libraries carry it. Rybkovich ( talk) 03:36, 20 February 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to Berkeley Student Cooperative. After reading over the discussion the only thing I can determine is that The Daily Californian is the only possibly usable source. I don't think it works on it's own though. As notability requires multiple sources, that also have to be regional or national. Not in the same location of the subject. Plus, it's independence is questionable. Although, maybe that could be disregarded, but the fact that it's local and only a single source can't be. Come up with one (really it should be two) good national or even regional, but preferably national, source (more like sources) that is independent and in-depth, and I'd be more then willing to change my vote. In the meantime though, there's zero wrong with redirecting this as an alternative to deletion. -- Adamant1 ( talk) 04:00, 26 February 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect with a selective merge to Berkeley Student Cooperative as suggested. Bearian ( talk) 14:23, 26 February 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to the suggested target. The sourcing just isn't quite there for the reasons discussed above, mostly by Metropolitan90, which I agree with, so I can't support keeping this. SportingFlyer T· C 02:23, 1 March 2021 (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.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Lothlorien_Hall_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=1010288753"

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook




Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE