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. Sr13 is almost Singu larity 02:32, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

University of Toronto student groups

[edit]

This is a glorified list, which should have that in the title. Aside from that, it's a long list that needs a lot of maintenance and isn't verified. It fails WP:NOR. Delete GreenJoe 03:35, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a directory of information which falls short of encyclopedic standards. Student groups are almost always unnotable (not to mention ephemeral), and the few that might be are best handled in the school's main article. --Dhartung | Talk 04:08, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep Agreeing that they are very very rarely worth individual articles, I think a list of this sort is a better way to deal with them than including them in articles. I think it's easier to maintain. DGG (talk) 04:25, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Imagining worse case scenarios does not justify a directory in clear violation of WP:NOT. Skeezix1000 12:37, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It doesn't matter whether these groups are individually notable or not. What matters is that Wikipedia is not the yellow pages, it is not a student guide, and it is not a directory. This list serves no encyclopedic purpose. Skeezix1000 12:37, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, listcruft. (My favorite all-purpose rationale). Realkyhick 18:27, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per all above. Luke! 01:33, 31 July 2007 (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.