Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Academy of Design Australia


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 22:39, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Academy of Design Australia

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Non-notable school. All the sources on the article are of absolutely no use, and I'm not finding anything under either of the school's names (string: "lci melbourne", "academy of design australia"). —Jéské Couriano v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 23:44, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Australia. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:06, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep . This is a degree giving organisation and the article is well sourced. Note that this kind of organisation is not called a school in Australia. That is a US term. --Bduke (talk) 02:44, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Being a degree-giving organisation means nothing, and have you even looked at the sources? Two of them 404 out (one of them marked as permanently dead), one is IMDb, another is its homepage, and the rest don't even mention the subject, let alone discuss them in any depth. —Jéské Couriano  v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 02:50, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * OK. Let me modify my opinion to Very weak keep. Degree giving organisation should be notable. Can anyone closer to this academy find sources. --Bduke (talk) 05:00, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Once again, that is not the case and has not been for ages now. —Jéské Couriano  v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 05:17, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Your link says "Most independently accredited degree-awarding institutions have enough coverage to be notable, although that coverage may not be readily available online.". Does that not fit this case? --Bduke (talk) 06:49, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I refer you to what I wrote in my deletion argument. I've looked for sources and come up empty. It's possible there are offline sources about it, but with the paucity of results overall and quality of said results I don't see any way the subject meets WP:NORG or WP:N. —Jéské Couriano  v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 18:42, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:00, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree there may be potential for a page, but potential cannot be the basis for the page’s existence. At the moment the sources are inadequate. Spinifex&#38;Sand (talk) 01:22, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete as failing WP:GNG. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:14, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Clearly, whether its a school or not, its just not notable. Lorstaking (talk) 04:06, 21 September 2022 (UTC)


 * 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.