This article was nominated for deletion on 12 April 2008. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
I don't see University of Western Ontario on the list on Playboy's website. What gives? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.249.6.237 (talk) 13:03, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps this article could use some expansion. Besselfunctions 22:55, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps this page can also verify its claims and be less biased.--Ryanlescure 02:58, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
All lists published by a commercial company which are not just compilations of facts, but are based on subjective criteria, are copyrighted, and cannot be included in Wikipedia articles. Corvus cornix 16:42, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
I think this article would benifit from a more world wide approach. I have heard from some sources that a number of European institutions have reputations for wildness. One example is Letterkenny Institute of Technology in Ireland. Perhaps someone can look into this. Piercetp 04:25, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
http://www.collegehumor.com/rankings is the rankings page I found from college humor. Doesn't this seem more of a party school rankings list? Purdue is amazing.
I see that my tags were taken off but I don't see why. To be honest I see this article as an AfD candidate. It is an article that recounts some completely arbitrary lists of dubious interest or significance. Its existence has confused at least one new author to make a spurious "top 10" article of his own on a different subject, which was as a mistake made in good faith. In fact, it was him who drew my attention here when we were discussing why his article was getting deleted.
Despite this, I am not sending the article to AfD right now. The article is linked elsewhere and there is external coverage. I am not saying that "If it is good enough for Encarta it is good enough for Wikipedia", but I am open to being persuaded. What would make all the difference would be for this to be converted into a properly referenced article without the lists. In other words, and article about the lists not of the lists. I will wait and see if there is progress here. If not, I may send it to AfD. --DanielRigal (talk) 16:17, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
dont doubt me —Preceding unsigned comment added by Treymcneil (talk • contribs) 01:01, 6 April 2008 (UTC)