User talk:Historian2003

Welcome!

Hello, Historian2003, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Durham University History Society, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

Article development
Standard layout
Lead section
The perfect article
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, ask me on my talk page. You can also type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:00, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Onel5969, thank you for flagging potential issues with the page for the Durham University History Society.

I understand your first issue with the lack of secondary sources for the society. All I can say to that is that I know of plans to create and publish a history of the society through Durham Student Union affiliated groups.

The second regarding notability I must say I am more surprised about. The society has a near century-long history in which it has hosted some of the most prestigious historians from across the United Kingdom (those listed on the site being just a few) and represented the history student body of one of the top 3 history departments in the country (a position it has held pretty steadily since records began). Its importance has been recognised by major international firms with sponsors ranging from global accounting titan EY to some of the largest UK-based law firms in the world, such as magic circle member Clifford Chance and others such as Simmons & Simmons, as well as one of the largest publishing house in the world, Macmillan Publishing. The society’s publication (Critical Historical Studies) has similarly been publicised by some of the most prestigious universities, not least Durham (6^th ranked in UK, 3^rd for History), including Kings College London and Harvard University (https://history.fas.harvard.edu/call-papers-other-universities).

Moreover, its notability is at a comparable if not greater degree than societies listed at the bottom of the page. To demonstrate my point, I will go through them. Trinity Mathematical Society, though established by a notable mathematician, has otherwise only a list of prestigious speakers to vouch for it (and only one reference), a list that Durham University History Society (DUHS from now on) more than matches. Oxford University Democratic Socialist Club has but one reference and no clear evidence for its notability, and yet has only been flagged for the reliability of its sources. University College Players is a college-level club, hardly with a notability comparable to DUHS. Hysteron Proteron Club at Balliol College Oxford is similarly a college-level club with its notability resting on one mention in the house of commons, reflecting the pervasion of Oxbridge graduates in the British house of commons and the ‘Oxbridge boys club’ nature of that institution, particularly 20 years ago (see for example: https://www.varsity.co.uk/news/8279,https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/apr/19/oxford-union-created-ruling-political-class-boris-johnson-michael-gove-theresa-may-rees-mogg, https://www.ft.com/content/85fc694c-9222-11e9-b7ea-60e35ef678d2), rather than reflecting any notability. Oxford Socratic Club, a club that lasted less than a decade, also has a vast page and whose notability, as far as I can tell, is based on notable speakers and allegedly ‘Famous debates’ (that conspicuously lack a single citation) – once again a list of speakers that is comparable and notably less important to modern academic study than that of DUHS. Oxford University Wine Circle too has a page, yet its only notability stems from the extravagant wines the society's members could afford to purchase as well as a sponsorship from Pol Roger – a sponsorship arguably less prestigious than those DUHS have had. The Oxford University Archaeology Society is another student society whose history is similarly long to DUHS (though more chequered). Finally, the Durham University Christian Union has a length page and yet one with no references and limited content of notability, including mentions of a ‘weekend House Party’!?

I hope this has suitably outlined my reasoning for the society’s Wikipedia page, and demonstrated that many comparably, if not less, notable societies have similar pages. I am, of course, open to any suggestions that you think may help cover any further queries or resolve the matter in another way. I hope my defence has come across in a resolute manner but also in a manner fair and respectful of your important work – in no way do I intend, and indeed I apologise if I have, to cause offence or show any level of disrespect towards you. Historian2003 (talk) 23:45, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Durham University History Society

The article Durham University History Society has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Zero in-depth coverage from independent, secondary sources. Currently sourced with only primary sources.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:00, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Onel5969, thank you for flagging potential issues with the page for the Durham University History Society.

I understand your first issue with the lack of secondary sources for the society. All I can say to that is that I know of plans to create and publish a history of the society through Durham Student Union affiliated groups.

The second regarding notability I must say I am more surprised about. The society has a near century-long history in which it has hosted some of the most prestigious historians from across the United Kingdom (those listed on the site being just a few) and represented the history student body of one of the top 3 history departments in the country (a position it has held pretty steadily since records began). Its importance has been recognised by major international firms with sponsors ranging from global accounting titan EY to some of the largest UK-based law firms in the world, such as magic circle member Clifford Chance and others such as Simmons & Simmons, as well as one of the largest publishing house in the world, Macmillan Publishing. The society’s publication (Critical Historical Studies) has similarly been publicised by some of the most prestigious universities, not least Durham (6^th ranked in UK, 3^rd for History), including Kings College London and Harvard University (https://history.fas.harvard.edu/call-papers-other-universities).

Moreover, its notability is at a comparable if not greater degree than societies listed at the bottom of the page. To demonstrate my point, I will go through them. Trinity Mathematical Society, though established by a notable mathematician, has otherwise only a list of prestigious speakers to vouch for it (and only one reference), a list that Durham University History Society (DUHS from now on) more than matches. Oxford University Democratic Socialist Club has but one reference and no clear evidence for its notability, and yet has only been flagged for the reliability of its sources. University College Players is a college-level club, hardly with a notability comparable to DUHS. Hysteron Proteron Club at Balliol College Oxford is similarly a college-level club with its notability resting on one mention in the house of commons, reflecting the pervasion of Oxbridge graduates in the British house of commons and the ‘Oxbridge boys club’ nature of that institution, particularly 20 years ago (see for example: https://www.varsity.co.uk/news/8279,https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/apr/19/oxford-union-created-ruling-political-class-boris-johnson-michael-gove-theresa-may-rees-mogg, https://www.ft.com/content/85fc694c-9222-11e9-b7ea-60e35ef678d2), rather than reflecting any notability. Oxford Socratic Club, a club that lasted less than a decade, also has a vast page and whose notability, as far as I can tell, is based on notable speakers and allegedly ‘Famous debates’ (that conspicuously lack a single citation) – once again a list of speakers that is comparable and notably less important to modern academic study than that of DUHS. Oxford University Wine Circle too has a page, yet its only notability stems from the extravagant wines the society's members could afford to purchase as well as a sponsorship from Pol Roger – a sponsorship arguably less prestigious than those DUHS have had. The Oxford University Archaeology Society is another student society whose history is similarly long to DUHS (though more chequered). Finally, the Durham University Christian Union has a length page and yet one with no references and limited content of notability, including mentions of a ‘weekend House Party’!?

I hope this has suitably outlined my reasoning for the society’s Wikipedia page, and demonstrated that many comparably, if not less, notable societies have similar pages. I am, of course, open to any suggestions that you think may help cover any further queries or resolve the matter in another way. I hope my defence has come across in a resolute manner but also in a manner fair and respectful of your important work – in no way do I intend, and indeed I apologise if I have, to cause offence or show any level of disrespect towards you.

Historian2003 (talk) 23:46, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Durham University History Society for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Durham University History Society is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Durham University History Society until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 09:53, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A note on participating in AfDs

Hi Historian2003. I see you're relatively new to Wikipedia and its great to see your keenness to contribute - we need people like that here. I also understand the frustration of having an article you have created and spent time on being nominated for deletion - I had a similar experience when I was new to Wikipedia myself. Don't be disheartened - Wikipedia's guidelines on notability are not necessarily obvious to the newcomer - you might find it useful to read through WP:GNG to get a better sense of what people mean when they say that something is not notable enough for an article. I would also recommend that you avoid posting excessively long messages on discussions like this AfD - and especially to avoid copying & pasting the same response multiple times on the same page. Many editors will simply be put off reading a wall of text like that, and some may even consider it to be disruptive. Once you've had your say, allow other editors to read through the discussion and add their voice if they want to - you don't need to respond to every person but only if you have something new to say. I hope you enjoy your time on Wikipedia - please do let me know if you have any questions. WJ94 (talk) 09:56, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]