This article is a mix of dicdef,WP:OR and misunderstanding. The tl;dr is that we don't need it and it is actively harmful in suggesting the misnomer a bachelor's degree, once awarded, may be referred to as an "undergraduate degree".
The first thing to note is that almost none of the references even hint that "undergraduate degree" is a thing. A few of the references talk about "undergraduate degree program(me)s", which is better and if kept, this article should be moved to that name. There is just one source, the QAA source, that contains4.17.6 In Scotland a small number of universities (Aberdeen, Glasgow, Edinburgh and St Andrews (the Scottish Ancients) have a long tradition of labelling certain undergraduate academic degrees as Master of Arts 'MA'. However, even here, they are clearly speaking about "undergraduate academic degree programs". No source defines or makes the case that there is such a concept as "undergraduate degree" once the student has graduated.
An alternative to deletion is to redirect toUndergraduate education. However that alternative was discussed in a poorly attended merge proposal in 2022 and rejected. Having more eyes on it here at AfD will be beneficial and I do not oppose that ATD.
Keep: While the article may require improvement in the information that it expresses, it doesn't mean that there aren't valid sources that exist to cover this topic (seeWP:NEXIST). Considering that this satisfiesWP:GNG, is a broad enough topic (more specific than the individual types of degrees), and is aLevel-5 Vital article, I'd say what this article needs isn't deletion, but an increased supplement of reliable sources and restructuring, at best. —Alex26337(talk)09:48, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
At AfD we need to review the sources. They don't need to be in the article, but we can't just assume they exist either. What articles speak about "undergraduate degrees" as a thing rather than "undergraduate degree programmes" which lead to graduation with a degree?Sirfurboy🏄 (talk)10:14, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per Alex26337, this is clearly notable. A quick Google shows many sources referring to 'undergraduate degree' - it obviously satisfiedWP:GNG. I also note that the nominator has been going around removing links to this article prior to this discussion being completed, making the article appear less important to the rest of Wikipedia.Robminchin (talk)16:21, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And again, at AfD we need to review the sources. What independent reliable secondary sources are calling this thing an "undergraduate degree"?Sirfurboy🏄 (talk)17:02, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Basically, this is a standard term that is used all over the place. It appears that you did not do the basic check of searching for sources before nominating this article for deletion and are instead making other editors do the work for you.Robminchin (talk)19:30, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When the term is used on the admissions page of a college it is evident that they are talking about their programmes. Those are geared to undergraduate admissions to a degree programme. Where does it get used of graduates with one of these degrees? The Times quotes in Collins are a little more interesting but they lack essential context to evaluate the sources against the usual criteria. Also be aware of the talk on the talk page of the article, where, on 9 October 2018, an IP pointed out the curious effect of citogenesis (or a variant of it). And please assume good faith. Although a WP:BEFORE is not, in fact, required at AfD, it should be clear that I reviewed all sources on the page. In addition I read through the whole talk page and conducted Google searches and books searches. I found a lot of admissions brochures for undergraduate degree programmes, and see the nom. statement for my views on that. I did not find people saying things like "Baroness Casey has an undergraduate degree in history" in any sources. I did find people saying that on Wikipedia, mind.Sirfurboy🏄 (talk)19:53, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They are telling people what the qualification is that they are studying for. You are reading your interpretation into the sources against the plain meaning of the English language - they say things like "An undergraduate degree can be an associate or a bachelor's" (ODU) or "An undergraduate degree is an academic credential awarded by a college or university after completing a prescribed course of study" (KU). The quotes fromThe Times are clearly also referring in at least two of the cases to people who have graduated. The QAA document is talking about the qualification awarded. The UNESCO document uses undergraduate degree to talk about the qualification someone is expected to have prior to starting a master's degree.
I did a Google News search for you for "undergraduate degree in history" and the first result starts "Savannah Jackson earned her undergraduate degree in history at Saint Mary’s College in South Bend"[4]. Another result has "DeSantis earned his undergraduate degree in history from Yale University"[5], while yet another has "Grubb studied pre-law, then English but eventually earned his undergraduate degree in history at Washington and Lee University"[6]. It might not be Baroness Casey, but that bit's not particularly relevant.
You can also find stories saying things like "Recent research shows that jobs which once required A-level qualifications now need an undergraduate degree"[7] or "Today, more people are pursuing higher education than ever before, so it’s normal to take an undergraduate degree for granted, and for job applications to be competitive"[8] – again, clearly referring to the qualification.
WP:BEFORE literally starts "Prior to nominating article(s) for deletion, please be sure to:" and includes, underWP:DILIGENCE, "The minimum search expected is a normal Google search, a Google Books search, and a Google News search".Robminchin (talk)22:54, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have already explained that I exceeded the requirements ofWP:BEFORE. The issue is that we are not approaching this from the same angle. You appear to be arguing the page should exist based on the fact the term getsused, whereas I am saying that the page should only exist if there is a subject by this name. Although you will no doubt object that this is also exactly what you are arguing, and that you have presented evidence now that the usage of the term demonstrates the subject. But that is where the disagreement lies. That people speak loosely with this term is clear, and so that it shows up in some news sources is to be expected. None of those sources suggest that there is any encyclopaedic subject of "undergraduate degree" such that a graduate with a bachelors degree holds an "undergraduate degree." In fact they hold a degree. This is often a first degree, and they may hold a post-graduate qualification too. But the concept that a graduate might hold an "undergraduate degree" is sloppy usage, and the attempt to create a page based on occasional misusage would beWP:SYNTH.Likewise, basing the page on admissions pages (as the page is now, and as per your sources 2 and 3) is only really valid if you are talking about undergraduate courses of study that lead to a degree. But what this page is saying is that there are a class of degrees that are undergraduate degrees (treated as a group and larger than bachelors degrees, theWP:COMMONNAME for those). Why? Well simply, I think, because they are not post-graduate degrees and because associate degrees and foundation degrees exist. But what sources do we have that say there is a class of degrees that are commonly (because the article must followWP:COMMONNAME) called undergraduate degrees, once awarded? If this page is about undergraduate study it should be merged or renamed, per what I said in the nom. If this page is saying there are a class of degrees that are commonly called undergraduate degrees, we still don't have the sources for that.Sirfurboy🏄 (talk)11:14, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You appear to be shifting ground now that your original claims have been demonstrated to be incorrect. To be clear:
'it is actively harmful in suggesting the misnomer a bachelor's degree, once awarded, may be referred to as an "undergraduate degree"'. False. Reliable sources use 'undergraduate degree' to refer to bachelor's degrees, associate degrees, Scottish MAs, integrated master's degrees, etc.
'almost none of the references even hint that "undergraduate degree" is a thing.' False. It is referred to repeatedly by reliable sources.
'even here [the QAA document], they are clearly speaking about "undergraduate academic degree programs"'. False. They are talking about the Scottish MA, which is a qualification not a program.
'No source defines or makes the case that there is such a concept as "undergraduate degree" once the student has graduated.' False. Reliable sources repeatedly refer to people holding undergraduate degrees.
And, in your recent post, 'None of those sources suggest that there is any encyclopaedic subject of "undergraduate degree" such that a graduate with a bachelors degree holds an "undergraduate degree."'. False. The university articles cited, and others that could have been cited, do precisely that, with pages titled things like "What is an undergraduate degree" that state, explicitly, that it takes in bachelor's degrees. Reliable news sources repeatedly refer to people holding undergraduate degrees.
Basically, your whole premise is demonstrably false. It appears that the problem is that you don't like the term and so define any use of it as "people speak[ing] loosely". In Wikipedia, we are supposed to follow the sources, not decide that we know better than them.Robminchin (talk)00:45, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have not shifted ground. I said at the outset that this article is a mix ofWP:DICDEF,WP:OR and misunderstanding. It is aWP:DICDEF, despite dictionaries not actually including this definition themselves. I suspect you know that since you quoted the usages in Collins, but despite Collins finding a few usages, it appears they are insufficient for them to consider it meets the criteria for inclusion as a definition in their dictionary. What they do include, however, is a definition forfirst degree, thus:
People who have gained a higher qualification after completing a basic university degree such as a BA or a BSc refer to that basic degree as their first degree.[9]
First degree, therefore, is theWP:COMMONNAME and if kept, the article should be renamed. Note that even in their definition, they do not includeundergraduate degree. And they are not alone. The Oxford English Dictionary has no definition forundergraduate degree but says offirst degree,
The academic qualification achieved by an undergraduate student on graduation (later often as contrasted with postgraduate qualifications); the course of study leading to this.
Wikipedia is not a dictionary, perWP:NOT, and dictionary definitions are excluded from articles under the second arm ofWP:N, which states that a subject is notable for an article if it meetsWP:GNG and is not excluded under WP:NOT. The dictionary definition is excluded.What aboutWP:OR? Well, inasmuch as we are synthesising a subject from primary sources using the term (or not, as the case is for many of the sources), the article isWP:OR. However I am now less convinced there is not a subject here at all. But what sources speak to the subject? Noting that we have a page about bachelors degrees, and another for foundation degrees and another for associate degrees, this article is essentially a wrapper for these, around the definition of a first degree. That is, a degree that is not a postgraduate degree. We still don't have sources that show these are treated as a subject, but it perhaps stands to reason that such a subject might exist. How is it different fromUndergraduate education though? What are secondary sources saying about first degrees as a class and subject in themselves, that is not said in an article on undergraduate education? Isn't this a case ofWP:NOPAGE? Should this be merged withUndergraduate education? There is nothing that can be said here that cannot be said elsewhere (other than a dictionary definition that even dictionaries don't carry). Unless, that is, we have some sources that show otherwise.Sirfurboy🏄 (talk)09:33, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep I think the best outcome here is building this article up as an overview of the types of undergraduate degrees, with sections for each type of degree and "see more" links to each of those degrees. If people are looking for multiple types of undergraduate degrees, it would be useful to have something more than just a disambiguation page or the undergraduate education page mentioned earlier in this AfD. However, if that cannot be done, I support a redirect or deletion of some kind. "First degree" should probably be a redirect to this page.Royal Autumn Crest (talk)14:52, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I was inclined to go redirect at first, but there are some decent arguments for keeping this as a general overview of the various types of undergraduate degrees, or at the very least dabify.Google Scholar has some results, which probably would be helpful to add. It is a legitimate question if this is a fork ofundergraduate education and the assorted degrees. ←Metallurgist (talk)04:14, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
