Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Workers and Punks University

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 keep. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010 • (talk) 09:24, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

The Workers and Punks University

The Workers and Punks University (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

No evidence of notability. Eleassar ^{my talk} 10:15, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

• Comment Note that the article is out of date: it is apparently no longer organised by the Peace Institute – Institute for Contemporary Social and Political Studies, Ljubljana, but by the Institute for Labour Studies[1]. Also, its Slovenian name is Delavsko-punkerska univerza (DPU), which is often translated as Workers' Punk University or Workers-Punks' University or anything similar. There's little WP:RS coverage in English, but I suggest that people with relevant linguistic experience are encouraged to search for appropriate sources. --Colapeninsula (talk) 11:14, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
• Keep It seems there are two newspaper articles having The Workers and Punks University (TWPU) as their primary topic, one published in 2011 by Delo and authored by Jela Krečič, and another one by Dnevnik in 2013. I have added them as references with this edit together with other changes. --DancingPhilosopher (talk) 13:30, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Slovenia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:26, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:26, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

• Speedy keep, as per DancingPhilosopher. Beside the mentioned references, there's the Culture.si article in English. — Yerpo ^Eh? 05:01, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Comment Both the delo.si article and the dnevnik.si article were written by lecturers of the University, therefore the articles do not qualify as an independent coverage. Also, the culture.si article does not qualify as an independent mainstream coverage in any regard, as it is a wiki open to too many potential editors and includes a number of non-notable topics. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 09:49, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Comment Independency can not be interpreted as being tied to the individual journalist (and even if it could be, in case of Jela Krečič, she was invited only once in 2009, and was never an employee nor invited again by the University), because the independency is tied to the journalist's supervisor, i.e. editor, not the journalist, as it would be in case of self-publishing or blogging where there is no editorial process involved. --DancingPhilosopher (talk) 09:10, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

---

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:04, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

---

---

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:22, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

---

• Weak delete Weak keep. Uh, so I gave this a go and I only had passing mentions in ProQuest and no hits in other databases (and I tried multiple names, including the Slovene name). That culture.si source is very obviously a wiki (user-contributed?) and I'm okay with the Delo and Dnevnik sources' independence unless I'm missing something obvious (Krecic is a journalist, despite her affiliations). The thing is that I'm having trouble finding much more. Even after searching those sites, I'm getting opinion pieces and listings. There has to be more published on this, but I have to say it doesn't pass the GNG from what I'm able to find with my pitiful non-English searching. @DancingPhilosopher and Yerpo, are you able to pull more sources from area papers? And might this be a candidate for merging with Inštitut za delavske študije? czar ♔ 03:29, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Wait, so there's multiple independent sources and you still think it should be deleted/merged? Sorry, but I don't follow your line of reasoning. Culture.si is not an open public wiki, but a government ministry-curated site that happens to run on a wiki. — Yerpo ^Eh? 05:09, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Here's an additional source, a section by Veronika Gnezda directly about this subject on Radio Slovenia. — Yerpo ^Eh? 05:24, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

To your first question, yes. The reasoning is that the refs mentioned are still weak and there isn't enough to write an article about the topic. What is the level of editorial control over culture.si? I can't find anything on it and there appear to be multiple contributors. How are contributions vetted and what is their editorial policy? Do you have any more print sources that discuss the topic in depth? czar ♔ 06:29, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Culture.si states that each article is edited, and the editorial board is plainly listed. Even without that, there is enough information to support a decent stub at least (especially in the Dnevnik's feature which you can't call weak by any stretch). — Yerpo ^Eh? 11:28, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it's a wiki, so it's edited. My question is about editorial control and fact-checking, about who writes the pages and how they treat submissions. I did not think it would be so hard to name a few extra sources if such are available in the language. When I said the sourcing is weak, it means the available sources as a body do not indicate that a full article can be written on the topic. It's a gray area but I'm willing to err towards weak keep now. czar ♔ 23:29, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it's a wiki, so it's edited. Quite obviously, the term "edited" refers to activity by the editorial board in this context. — Yerpo ^Eh? 09:27, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Where is there any indication that there is a standard of editorial quality? Or that the contributions of names not associated with the editors are vetted in some way? czar ♔ 14:29, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

On the page I linked to above. It says that every entry is edited and proofread. It would make no sense for this statement to refer to "editing" as we understand it in the context of Wikipedia. Furthermore, this is not an open wiki, so contributors are pre-selected in the first place. So there's editorial control even before entries are created. — Yerpo ^Eh? 17:09, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

I don't think that's entirely explicit, but sounds good, thank you czar ♔ 19:50, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

• Keep, unless one or more native speakers can be found who can interpret the sources including the Radio Slovenia program "Delavsko punkerska univerza found by Yerbo, and who evaluate the topic as non-notable. I don't understand the Slovene language but catch a few words and understand it is a 11:53 long program with discussion/interviews with numerous persons, including one or more "doctros of philosophy", and using terms captilist, marxist, communist, economy. It includes cuts of the Theme from Rocky during :53 to 1:13 and again at ~10:45, of Europe (band)'s The Final Countdown (song) at 1:43 and during 11:15 to 11:53, of Bob Marley's Redemption Song at about 8:00, some song about "Revolutzia" at about 6:25. Honestly it seemed like an in-depth serious discussion, and Yerpo has asserted this radio show is on the topic, so this item does seem to be a significant source. I recommend playing the whole radio show while you're doing something else, just to hear the tone and interesting language and the inspiring music. :) --doncram 22:38, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

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.