Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Majilpur J. M. Training School

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. Without supplementing the sources the keep arguments allude to, the assertion that this school is notable remains unsubstantiated. ✗plicit 03:48, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Majilpur J. M. Training School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Mentions, listings, but not enough in-depth coverage to pass WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:39, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:39, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:46, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:46, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep there are some basic sources from a quick search. Therefore, highly likely that sources exist, but they are offline, and quite possibly not in English. Neither of which are reasons to delete this article. 42.110.152.67 (talk) 06:17, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  @42.110.152.67: Could you please point out any such sources, particularly if they cover the subject in detail (WP:SIGCOV)? — MarkH₂₁^talk 05:06, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete private educational institute with no claim of notability. Riteboke (talk) 07:40, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Clearly notable. Plenty of sourcing, as with any tertiary institution in West Bengal. 42.110.158.21 (talk) 06:27, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nomination, no references provided satisfy WP:SIGCOV. SunDawn (talk) 08:25, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. This is the only WP:SECONDARY source I could find for this, and it is probably not significant coverage. –Novem Linguae (talk) 12:01, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: lacks WP:SIGCOV defcon5 (talk) 05:43, 19 April 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.