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 Queen Mary, University of London. Consensus is that there's no basis for a standalone article. Content can be merged from the history based on subsequent editorial consensus.  Sandstein  19:34, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Centre for Anglo-German Cultural Relations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is about a research centre at Queen Mary University. I can find no significant coverage about this research centre to establish notability. Whpq (talk) 14:39, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. —• Gene93k (talk) 19:34, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Week Keep in that I agree there does not appear to be much coverage but is part of a big University, it maybe we are not looking in the right place. VERTott 10:00, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Lots of things are part of big universities. But that doesn't mean that they are given standalone articles. Most university faculties don't end up with their own articles unless they have programs with reputations that generate the necessary coverage. -- Whpq (talk) 10:17, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This article has been nominated for rescue. VERTott 10:00, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep/merge Our editing policy indicates that deletion is inappropriate because there are better alternatives such as merger with articles about QMC or Anglo-German relations. Warden (talk)

• How many people are part of this? If they've had thousands of students, then its important. If its just one small class somewhere, then it probably isn't. Size matters when comes to determining if its a major part of the university or not. Dream Focus 12:21, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• The three Google news archive are all written by the director of this center. Would he be considered a notable enough expert on a subject to publish his opinions on something, or was he chosen because of his position? The latter would indicate they consider that facility notable enough to asks someone from it to give opinions on things. Dream Focus 12:33, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete a mere 3 gnews hits and there is a lack of indepth coverage about the actual centre itself like its history, achievements etc fails WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 15:34, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: the only hits I can find on this source is a few mere mention of the fact that this or that academic is affiliated with it. It therefore fails "significant coverage". And no, it is third-party coverage that matters, not WP:BIGNUMBERs. It is easily possible for university programmes to have classes in the thousands, but be so blandly generic and mechanical (i) that nobody would bother commenting on them & (ii) they're indistinguishable from similar programmes in any other large university. There is no indication that the research in this field is sufficiently prominent to merit a mention in the Queen Mary, University of London article. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 07:06, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge/redirect to Queen Mary, University of London. Not enough material to support a standalone page but certainly plenty enough sources to support a merge. I note that the nomination is fatally flawed since it hasn't addressed a merge as required by WP:BEFORE which is also the case with the delete !votes. TerriersFan (talk) 23:50, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - "Fatally flawed?" - If I thought there was anything worth merging, I would have merged it. -- Whpq (talk) 02:14, 22 June 2011 (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.