Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harvard Graduate School of Design

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 speedy keep. It looks like we're going to have a White Christmas after all Mgm|^(talk) 10:16, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Harvard Graduate School of Design

This school is not WP:N on its own with any third party sources. 16x9 (talk) 21:49, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Where to start? Notable graduates and faculty: Shaun Donovan is Obama's choice to head the Department of Housing and Urban Development 1. I found news coverage from 1938 in a google news search 1,and 2. Lastly, the school profound influence in American academics is documented in google scholar. --Jmundo (talk) 22:28, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Harvard itself is so important in American history and culture that we should let this one slide by without secondary sources. (I know WP policies "notability is not inherited", etc.) Redddogg (talk) 22:47, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Come on! It's Harvard, no need to delete it. Keep per above. Tavix (talk) 23:22, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - AfD is not the place to propose merges. TerriersFan (talk) 03:05, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. —TerriersFan (talk) 03:12, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep--notability is usually not inherited, but in some cases, well, this is one of those cases. What was this nominator thinking? Drmies (talk) 04:46, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- It has an endowment of over $400 million, that's definitely notable, and like others have said, "Come on! It's Harvard."Joeycfc (talk) 07:52, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per common sense. Deletion is for unsourceable, not unsourced. Is it really necessary to say anything to prove that sources are out there to support keeping the article even under the most stringent interpretation of the guidelines, even if the sources are not in the article? A case where the sources are so numerous it is hard for a non-expert to find the most appropriate.John Z (talk) 09:05, 24 December 2008 (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.