Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Institute of Engineering and Technology (Pakistan)

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 22:49, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Institute of Engineering and Technology (Pakistan)

[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 coverage found, fails WP:GNG. Störm (talk) 16:57, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:28, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:28, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:29, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:34, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac 1 5 02:22, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Accredited degree-awarding tertiary institutions are generally held to be notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:48, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We can't keep articles on the base of assumptions. Your comment is not policy based as it changed after RfC. The article has to pass WP:GNG for which it need WP:RS. Störm (talk) 18:29, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The highly controversial RfC only referred to secondary institutions. It most certainly cannot be extended to tertiary institutions when they were never mentioned in it just because some editors would like it to be. No assumptions here, just consensus, which has always been as I said. -- Necrothesp (talk) 22:54, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per nom. Article is a promotional piece. The above WP:ITSNOTABLE comment is unconvincing. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 18:57, 21 May 2020 (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.