Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Career Point University, Kota

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. Same rationale as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/VIT University Jaipur. Sandstein 14:43, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Career Point University, Kota

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

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

No solid news about Career Point University. Started by coaching business people. Laptopinmyhands (talk) 02:07, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:16, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:17, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Accredited degree-awarding university. We invariably keep these. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:20, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 13:20, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:26, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: A university is at least somewhat notable. I will add some tags to suggest some page improvements. Gusfriend (talk) 06:51, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Please make comments With sources. Also, where is it written that all accredited universities are notable by default? Laptopinmyhands (talk) 13:03, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:NSCHOOLS. Given sources are either listings or "we have a party"-type. A WP:BEFORE did not give any in-depth sources. The Banner talk 13:46, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Modussiccandi (talk) 14:12, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: as per WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. - Hatchens (talk) 03:46, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Did you see the results of the RFC there? And especially the part WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES should be added to the Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions, as it is an accurate statement of the results but promotes circular reasoning.. The Banner talk 09:41, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete there's some trivial name drops about it in articles related to other things. outside of that there's kind of in-depth article that covers it from Seasonal Magazine, but it's a blog and the article comes of like a badly written PR piece. So it's not usable for notability. --Adamant1 (talk) 03:23, 8 March 2022 (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.