Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amal Jyothi College of Engineering (2nd nomination)

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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. Daniel (talk) 22:40, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Amal Jyothi College of Engineering

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Amal Jyothi College of Engineering (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The prev AFD for this page was by a sock. However, post-cleanup this does not pass WP:HEY. Org does not pass WP:NSCHOOL or the more important WP:GNG. WP:RS are missing with a WP:BEFORE. Page relies on primary sources and has no inherent notability. Vikram Vincent 10:27, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Vikram Vincent 10:27, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. Vikram Vincent 10:27, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Vikram Vincent 10:27, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Accredited, degree-awarding tertiary institution. We have always kept these by consensus. Three of the five "keeps" on the AfD which closed less than three weeks ago did not even mention the sock nominator. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:40, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • the last 14 tertiary institutions from India you voted keep were deleted. I'd say that you are quoting a consensus for which you have no proof. Dont make your vote irrelevant. Bring WP:THREE sources to satisfy notability through evidence and I will withdraw my nomination. Vikram Vincent 10:55, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • The sock made a claim, Completely unsourced and promotional article, which was blatantly false and pointed out by two editors while another two editors pointed out the problem of letting socks start AFDs. One editor even said, if another editor feels this should be deleted, they can renominate and this close should not be considered as a normal Keep in that discussion. You had voted Accredited, degree-awarding tertiary institution, which is factually not true because as I had pointed out in another AFD there is a difference between an institution awarding degrees as a private deemed university and an institution affiliated to a university. I'd argue that universities are inherently notable while colleges are not. This particular institution is not a deemed university and hence has no inherent notability. Vikram Vincent 12:42, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: There are no independebt reliable sources as of now giving the subject in depth coverage to pass GNG. Kichu🐘 Need any help? 15:18, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete a new day has dawned at Wikipedia, we are now requiring reliable sources to keep articles.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:39, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Johnpacklambert - if only it had been like that from the very start... Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 20:38, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I know. It is amazing how little regulation there was in Wikipedia before about 2008, and how many articles that were created before 2008 have never been reviewed. With educational institutions the end to wild west inclusion standards did not come until 2018 maybe. Even to this day if one tries to prod delete an article on a place that can in any we be interpreted as a secondary institution when the article is sourced to only that institutions website it will be reverted. There is still huge resistance to anything approaching actual application of reasonable inclusion criteria. Do not get me started on how many articles on Catholic bishops are sourced only to one blog entry. The number of them is in the thousands, which is rivaled by articles sourced only to IMDb, although the later is not as bad as a percentage of all the actor/actress/director/film articles. It is daunting how much unsourced rubbish we have on Wikipedia.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:57, 26 March 2021 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Amal_Jyothi_College_of_Engineering_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=1015848616"