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. No useful information to merge. Malinaccier (talk) 03:05, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As the article itself cites, it's use of the term "ivy" is "intended to promote the other schools by comparing them to the Ivy League, but unlike the "Ivy League" label, they have no canonical definition". This hardly seems notable. The article is an academic booster-magnet and would grow to be a "loose collection" of vaguely defined "prestigious schools". As it currently stands, it provides no other reliable sources or information then what is already available in the article Ivy_league#Other_Ivies. Work permit (talk) 02:03, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge any useful and non-duplicated content (if there is any) into Ivy League] and delete this article. I see no reason to maintain two separate articles on the same term. Zachlipton (talk) 02:07, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete it's true that this is done but no evidence that it is notable (i.e. that the phenomenon of making this comparison has been noted). JJL (talk) 02:16, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It's not a colloquialism at all. The fact that publications refer to other "Ivies" should be a clue that they realize that there is only one "Ivy League". No graduate of Duke University or Cal Tech or MIT should ever feel insecure enough that they would have to pretend that they went to an "Ivy League school". Mandsford (talk) 02:59, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete vague scope with no notability of its own. The cited refs all seem to use it in relation to the realIvy League, and I don't see enough "value-added" content here to justify own article...just a trivial extension of what's already written in Ivy League ("Social elitism" section and wikilinks to other notable groupings with "Ivy" in their name). If I weren't fresh from vacation, I'd almost see this as a POV fork to booster schools that aren't Ivy but think it's important that some author used the word "Ivy" in relation to them sometime. DMacks (talk) 03:11, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I've given my reasoning on the article Talk page already, but briefly, it's a magnet for undocumented POV-pushing, and the encyclopedic portion of the topic is already covered well in the main Ivy League article. -- Rbellin|Talk 04:01, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and Mandsford. The more meaningful content is already included in the main Ivy League article, so no merge is needed. --Metropolitan90(talk) 07:06, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per Mandsford. RayTalk 12:55, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Mandsford and as an MIT alum. Madcoverboy (talk) 18:33, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There have been academic studies and scholarly literature discussing elite American universities that include all of the Ivies plus some other schools. However, they are careful to define the scope of their work using terms other than Ivy League. The article is inherently confusing and misleading. Racepacket (talk) 18:54, 28 July 2009 (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.
