Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Institute for Manufacturing

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 no consensus. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:31, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Institute for Manufacturing

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

Not notable in its own right per WP:ORG. A redir to Cambridge University Engineering Department may be an option. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 21:10, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greater reference to external work may be required. The IfM is in its own right arguably the most externally-facing element of one of the world's finest universities, and the article should draw on a large number of sources to back this up. It could be folded into the CUED article if it were more typical of CUED's output; it isn't, and deserves (a) its own article and (b) for that article to be better written and informative than it currently is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.27.239.172 (talk) 01:27, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The IfM is the Manufacturing and Management Division of the Department of Engineering in Cambridge. As you say, the IfM is one of the most externally facing elements of the University, and so deserves its own page. Greater referencing is required still. Forwarding to the University of Cambridge or Department of Engineering page does not make sense as visitors will be looking fr specific information about the IfM, and so people are not aware that the IfM is part of the Department of Engineering . (Nm402 (talk) 15:46, 4 January 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 12:14, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 12:14, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -- This is the only one of about five divisons of Cambridge University Engineering Department to have its own WP page, though each appears to have its own webpage, linked from that page, merely as a list of divisions, without any text on them individually. We need to decide whehter the other divisions should have their own WP page, or this should be merged back to the departmental page, leaving a redirect. Whatever happens the two need more integration. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:43, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The other divisions are smaller and - merely by dint of a reduced external face - are less referenced externally, making them less defensible under WP guidelines on notability. The IfM operates somewhat autonomously from a satellite site and is widely referenced in both topic-related and national media, as well as in HMG white papers and reports. There is a case for the IfM having a page separate from CUED as a whole which may not necessarily be echoed for all - or any - of the other divisions. Similarity may be drawn with Warwick Manufacturing Group. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jtlh2 (talk • contribs) 19:12, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Theopolisme (talk) 01:00, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 00:21, 17 January 2013 (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.