Svoboda | Graniru | BBC Russia | Golosameriki | Facebook
Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Durham University History Society

Add links
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 delete. Aoidh (talk) 01:58, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Durham University History Society[edit]

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

Durham University History Society (edit | 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)

A contested prod, and a lot of work was put into the article afterwards, unfortunately, there is still not a single in-depth reference from an independent, reliable, secondary source. And searches did not turn up enough to pass WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. Onel5969 TT me 09:53, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - Below is a version of my initial response once I was notified of this issue and thus also my reasoning for the maintenance of this site: I understand your first issue with the lack of secondary sources for the society. I have now added extra sources not affiliated to the History Society, including secondary sources, which together I hope resolve the issue – sources ranging from publications like Past & Present to the Durham University Journal to Harvard University’s Website to The Times and to other individual books and articles. The second issue regarding notability I must say I am more surprised about. The society has a near century-long history in which it has hosted some of the most prestigious historians from across the United Kingdom (those listed on the site being just a few) and represented the history student body of one of the top 3 history departments in the country (a position it has held pretty steadily since records began). Its importance has been recognised by major international firms with sponsors ranging from global accounting titan Ernst & Young (EY) to some of the largest UK-based law firms in the world, such as magic circle member Clifford Chance and others such as Simmons & Simmons, as well as one of the largest publishing houses in the world, Macmillan Publishing. The society’s publication (Critical Historical Studies) has similarly been publicised by some of the most prestigious universities, not least Durham (6th ranked in UK, 3rd for History), including Kings College London and Harvard University (https://history.fas.harvard.edu/call-papers-other-universities). Moreover, its notability is at a comparable, if not greater, degree than the societies listed at the bottom of the page, which all have Wikipedia pages. To demonstrate my point, I will go through them. Trinity Mathematical Society, though established by a notable mathematician, has otherwise only a list of prestigious speakers to vouch for it (and only one reference), a list that Durham University History Society (DUHS from now on) more than matches. Oxford University Democratic Socialist Club has but one reference and no clear evidence for its notability, and yet has only been flagged for the reliability of its sources. University College Players is a college-level club, hardly with a notability comparable to DUHS. Hysteron Proteron Club at Balliol College Oxford is similarly a college-level club with its notability resting on one mention in the house of commons, reflecting the pervasion of Oxbridge graduates in the British house of commons and the ‘Oxbridge boys club’ nature of that institution, particularly 20 years ago (see for example: https://www.varsity.co.uk/news/8279, https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/apr/19/oxford-union-created-ruling-political-class-boris-johnson-michael-gove-theresa-may-rees-mogg, https://www.ft.com/content/85fc694c-9222-11e9-b7ea-60e35ef678d2), rather than reflecting any notability. Oxford Socratic Club, a club that lasted less than a decade, also has a vast page and whose notability, as far as I can tell, is based on notable speakers and allegedly ‘Famous debates’ (that conspicuously lack a single citation) – once again a list of speakers that is comparable and notably less important to modern academic study than that of DUHS. Oxford University Wine Circle too has a page, yet its only notability stems from the extravagant wines the society's members could afford to purchase as well as a sponsorship from Pol Roger – a sponsorship arguably less prestigious than those DUHS have had. The Oxford University Archaeology Society is another student society whose history is similarly long to DUHS (though more chequered). Finally, the Durham University Christian Union has a lengthy page and yet one with no references and limited content of notability, including mentions of a ‘weekend House Party’! I hope this has suitably outlined my reasoning for the society’s Wikipedia page, and demonstrated that many comparably, if not less, notable societies have similar pages. --------------------------Links to talked about wikipedia pages: Trinity Mathematical Society https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity_Mathematical_Society Oxford University Democratic Socialist Club https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_University_Democratic_Socialist_ClubUniversity College Players https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_College_Players Hysteron Proteron Club https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysteron_Proteron_Club Socratic Club https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_Club Oxford University Wine Society https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_University_Wine_Circle The Oxford Archaeological Society https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_University_Archaeological_Society Durham University Christian Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durham_Inter-Collegiate_Christian_UnionHistorian2003 (talk) 22:44, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge - Above is my reasoning for the maintenance of the page. However, if members still do not believe it meets the criteria for a full page I might suggest that part of it is included in the page 'List of social activities at Durham University', just like, for example, the 'Durham Revue'. (If it is of any relevance I think lists are subject to different notability guidelines, although I am not sure)Historian2003 (talk) 22:49, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Prob delete - it seems highly unlikely that a student society would meet the relevant notability criteria. As far as I am concerned, notability would only be considered to have been unquestionably met if there was significant third-party media about. It is possible that someone has published a book about the history of the society, but I haven't been able to find it and it isn't currently on the page. Until or unless this kind of RS is found (or written), the subject is not notable and therefore the page should be deleted. JMWt (talk) 11:00, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi JMWt, thank you for your comment - all contributions to this discussion help us reach a sensible conclusion. I would just like to flag up that Wikipedia is populated by many student societies, including many much less notable than the Durham University History Society. It being a student society is therefore not, I believe, grounds enough for the deletion of the page. Below I have flagged multiple student societies with lesser or similar notability. Trinity Mathematical Society, though established by a notable mathematician, has otherwise only a list of prestigious speakers to vouch for it (and only one reference), a list that Durham University History Society (DUHS from now on) more than matches. Oxford University Democratic Socialist Club has but one reference and no clear evidence for its notability, and yet has only been flagged for the reliability of its sources. University College Players is a college-level club, hardly with a notability comparable to DUHS. Hysteron Proteron Club at Balliol College Oxford is similarly a college-level club with its notability resting on one mention in the house of commons, reflecting the pervasion of Oxbridge graduates in the British house of commons and the ‘Oxbridge boys club’ nature of that institution, particularly 20 years ago (see for example: https://www.varsity.co.uk/news/8279, https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/apr/19/oxford-union-created-ruling-political-class-boris-johnson-michael-gove-theresa-may-rees-mogg,  https://www.ft.com/content/85fc694c-9222-11e9-b7ea-60e35ef678d2), rather than reflecting any notability. Oxford Socratic Club, a club that lasted less than a decade, also has a vast page and whose notability, as far as I can tell, is based on notable speakers and allegedly ‘Famous debates’ (that conspicuously lack a single citation) – once again a list of speakers that is comparable and notably less important to modern academic study than that of DUHS. Oxford University Wine Circle too has a page, yet its only notability stems from the extravagant wines the society's members could afford to purchase as well as a sponsorship from Pol Roger – a sponsorship arguably less prestigious than those DUHS have had. The Oxford University Archaeology Society is another student society whose history is similarly long to DUHS (though more chequered). Finally, the Durham University Christian Union has a lengthy page and yet one with no references and limited content of notability, including mentions of a ‘weekend House Party’! Historian2003 (talk) 22:35, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't care about other pages that exist, the fact is that we are supposed to be determining AfD nominations based on policy. Also I will not be responding to large walls of text that say nothing very much. JMWt (talk) 09:00, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi JMWt, I fully understand your reply. Nonetheless, policy is (in every case, not just in the micro-universe of Wikipedia) determined as much by the written-down rules as it is by case studies that display how those rules are applied. My examples seek to provide such case studies.
    As a bit of a side note, please maintain a pleasant tone and be appreciative of the time people may have put into engaging with this process and your comment, regardless of whether you agree with them. Historian2003 (talk) 09:30, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, I've nominated several of these other societies for deletion because of very dubious notability. JMWt (talk) 10:15, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you, I think regardless of the outcome of this conversation, consistency is ultimately best for Wikipedia. More than half of the societies listed with similar or less notability than Durham University History Society remain un-nominated (for those reading this conversation). Historian2003 (talk) 13:35, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and England. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:19, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Going through a search, I have found this[1], this[2] and this[3], this[4]. Further, there are some media coverages as this[5], and this[6]. I guess this AfD is really complicated. I am into my verse to @Beccaynr: can enlighten more as they are known as iron hand on such educational topics.
Well that was something else. Not only were some of those references mentions, one of them wasn't. Durham University has a history department, that's not the same as a student history society. To be honest, that's the lamest !keep vote I think I've ever seen. JMWt (talk) 13:52, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't voted. Twinkle1990 (talk) 09:15, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Rollason, David (19 July 2016). The Power of Place: Rulers and Their Palaces, Landscapes, Cities, and Holy Places. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-16762-6.
  2. ^ Knight, Frances (8 April 2016). Religion, Identity and Conflict in Britain: From the Restoration to the Twentieth Century: Essays in Honour of Keith Robbins. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-317-06724-5.
  3. ^ Jones, Michael (24 September 2015). 24 Hours at Agincourt. Random House. ISBN 978-0-7535-5049-6.
  4. ^ Jones, Michael K. (2005). Agincourt 1415: Battlefield Guide. Pen & Sword Military. ISBN 978-1-84415-251-3.
  5. ^ "Boston College ranked 10th worldwide in theology, divinity, and religious studies". www.bc.edu.
  6. ^ https://history.fas.harvard.edu/sites/projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/history/files/critical_historical_studies_durham_university.pdf. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:17, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- Durham is a distinguished university, which no doubt teaches history. However, like most student societies, this one will be utterly NN. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2023 (UTC) -- Hi Peterkingiron, thank you for your comment - all contributions to this discussion help us reach a sensible conclusion. I would just like to flag up that Wikipedia is populated by many student societies, including many much less notable than the Durham University History Society. It being a student society is therefore not, I believe (as perhaps you do too), grounds enough for the deletion of the page. Indeed, below I have flagged multiple student societies with lesser or similar notability - I find it very hard to agree that the society's page is 'utterly NN' if these are considered acceptable. Trinity Mathematical Society, though established by a notable mathematician, has otherwise only a list of prestigious speakers to vouch for it (and only one reference), a list that Durham University History Society (DUHS from now on) more than matches. Oxford University Democratic Socialist Club has but one reference and no clear evidence for its notability, and yet has only been flagged for the reliability of its sources. University College Players is a college-level club, hardly with a notability comparable to DUHS. Hysteron Proteron Club at Balliol College Oxford is similarly a college-level club with its notability resting on one mention in the house of commons, reflecting the pervasion of Oxbridge graduates in the British house of commons and the ‘Oxbridge boys club’ nature of that institution, particularly 20 years ago (see for example: https://www.varsity.co.uk/news/8279, https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/apr/19/oxford-union-created-ruling-political-class-boris-johnson-michael-gove-theresa-may-rees-mogg, https://www.ft.com/content/85fc694c-9222-11e9-b7ea-60e35ef678d2), rather than reflecting any notability. Oxford Socratic Club, a club that lasted less than a decade, also has a vast page and whose notability, as far as I can tell, is based on notable speakers and allegedly ‘Famous debates’ (that conspicuously lack a single citation) – once again a list of speakers that is comparable and notably less important to modern academic study than that of DUHS. Oxford University Wine Circle too has a page, yet its only notability stems from the extravagant wines the society's members could afford to purchase as well as a sponsorship from Pol Roger – a sponsorship arguably less prestigious than those DUHS have had. The Oxford University Archaeology Society is another student society whose history is similarly long to DUHS (though more chequered). Finally, the Durham University Christian Union has a lengthy page and yet one with no references and limited content of notability, including mentions of a ‘weekend House Party’! Historian2003 (talk) 22:34, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Request - mainly due to the walls of text - can the keep voters please list the top 3 secondary references which indicate notability? ResonantDistortion 22:20, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - The fundamental question for notability is significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Of the sources presented in this AfD, the first four are passing mentions, one is not about the society, and one is not independent. Looking through the sources in the article, all are either passing mentions, primary sources, or not about the society at all. Arguments about the existence of other student societies are irrelevant, per WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS - if significant reliable independent sourcing can't be found for those articles, then they should also be deleted. WJ94 (talk) 09:47, 11 April 2023 (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/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Durham_University_History_Society&oldid=1149409749"