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.  Sandstein  17:34, 15 December 2015 (UTC) reply

MRC Social, Genetic and Developmental Psychiatry Centre

MRC Social, Genetic and Developmental Psychiatry Centre (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

The main institute is notable, the subdivisions, such as this one, are not. Our practice is to not make articles on institutes within departments within medical schools. We don't usually make for medical school or university departments either, but perhaps the main Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience at, King's College London is notable enough for that--I am not nominating it for deletion at this time. But going further does not seem appropriate. Having articles such as this and the adjacent AfD seems like a PR effort for the University DGG ( talk ) 23:46, 23 November 2015 (UTC) reply

• Keep - Medical Research Council (MRC) is a publicly funded government agency in the UK, and this (SGDP) is an MRC centre based at the University (instead of an institute within department within a school/faculty). Actually, many MRC centres have their own articles (see, for example, Edinburgh's Scottish Centre for Regenerative Medicine and MRC Human Genetics Unit, and Cambridge's MRC Cancer Unit). (This is my first discussion so sorry if I do this incorrectly.)-- Chanpeter ( talk) 19:16, 24 November 2015 (UTC) reply

I do not understand it quite that way. It is indeed sponsored by MRC and is one of their centers, but it seems to operate as one of the units of Kings Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience. DGG ( talk ) 06:07, 30 November 2015 (UTC) reply

• Delete - I agree with DGG's understanding of the normal practice, and I can't see any reason that the default practice should not apply. Thparkth ( talk) 17:47, 30 November 2015 (UTC) reply

• Comment - So Scottish Centre for Regenerative Medicine, MRC Mitochondrial Biology Unit, MRC Human Genetics Unit, MRC Cancer Unit, etc. should have been deleted if there is a "normal practice"? They (1) ARE operated as one of the units of uni as well; (2) do not have any additional citations. I don't mean those articles should be deleted, but, isn't this double standard? -- Chanpeter ( talk) 17:06, 3 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Human3015 ^TALK  21:12, 30 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Human3015 ^TALK  21:12, 30 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 19:08, 5 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp ( talk) 16:52, 7 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 18:27, 11 December 2015 (UTC) reply

• Delete - Not enough in-depth coverage for a stand-alone article. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:33, 15 December 2015 (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.