Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Buddhi Dharma University


 * 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 no consensus. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:03, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Buddhi Dharma University

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article was created by a persistent self promoter who has now been blocked. Only reference is an article on a different Wikipedia, which obviously is not sufficient. Looking at that article on Indonesian Wikipedia, the only sources used there appear to be the school's own website. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:45, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:50, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:52, 31 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Snow keep - all universities are inherently notable. According to the article, this new university is the recent result of combining other universities, so it probably doesn't have as many articles, but I don't see why it would not be notable. —Мандичка YO 😜 20:09, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * All genuine secondary and tertiary educational establishments are automatically notable but, given the behaviour of the author which got him blocked, I am not prepared to assume this "genuine" until I have checked it out. I'll !vote in a short while. --DanielRigal (talk) 21:01, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * , the Indonesian version of the article was created more than a year ago and has been edited by multiple people. The official website works fine for me. There's also this one on a different server, which I think is the academic login -  —Мандичка YO 😜 21:58, 31 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Undecided . My concern here is not notability but verifiability. For a "university" I am finding it pretty damn intangible. On my PC, their website often displays as a black page with "0%" written on it. I assume that it works better for other people but it does not look like the sort of mistake a serious academic institution would make. It is hit-and-miss if I can even get a page impression out of it at all. What I can sometimes get is a confused mixture of languages. Lots of the links at the top just take you back to the homepage and not much of the promised content actually exists. It could be a complete fake but I suspect it is just incompetent. You would not expect this from a university with an IT faculty, would you? Google Translate does not make for a great way to read it but I get two things from their history page: The place was founded as a college in 1912 but only became a University in January 2015.
 * So what does Google think? Well, not a lot. As far as Google Scholar and Books are concerned there ain't no such thing as "Buddhi Dharma University". So how does it fare under the name "Universitas Buddhi Dharma", which is what it says on the website? Not much better. Still sod all in Google Scholar or books to suggest that this is a real university that publishes papers and so on.
 * So, what have we got here? I don't know. Maybe it is a genuine FE college. Maybe it is a diploma mill. Maybe it is something else entirely but I don't see proof of a university as I understand the term. Unless it has a third name (maybe its previous name before it became a university) which it is more notable under I am not able to !vote this as a "keep". All it would take to get that "keep" would be a government website listing it as an authorised and accredited university. Any RS news report for the Inauguration ceremony would also serve to prove it was genuine.
 * I believe that we need somebody with the local language skill and knowledge to tell us what is really going on here.
 * If it is a "keep" then I suggest we gut out everything not verified, even if it only leaves a stub.
 * --DanielRigal (talk) 21:35, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I was able to get their website to load, but it doesn't do anything or say anything substantive about the institution. . I don't know if Indonesia has anything like accrediting bodies for universisites, which help you tell the difference between the real deal and a diploma mill, but if it does I am unable to find any evidence of any accrediting body endorsing this school. I could declare the "University of Beeblebrox Institute for Wikipedia editing" set up a crummy website with generic pictures of students and buildings, and spam up an a Wikipedia article about it, that doesn't make it real. Hence why I agree with you that "snow keep" is not the likeley outcome of this discussion. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:04, 31 May 2015 (UTC)


 * FYI here is a news report that mentions the inauguration ceremony. Additional searches bring your normal results (including YouTube clips with music and some kind of play on campus). I just don't see why people are so suspicious after doing a basic search. —Мандичка YO 😜 22:08, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Machine translation from Indonesian is pretty dicey, but that article seems to mainly discuss grant monies being disbursed to the Uneversity of Tangerang, while also mentioning "Buddi Dharma Land Gokap". I'm unable to find a translation for "Gokap" but it doesn't seem to mean "accredited university" because the translator recognizes those words in Indonesian. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:17, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * It says the mayor attended the inauguration of this university "Kepastian ini diungkapkan Walikota Tangerang Arief R Wismansyah kepada Tangerang Ekspres usai menghadiri peresmian Universitas Buddhi Dharma Tangerang" = "The mayor of Tangerang Arief R Wismansyah confirmed this (I think it says confirmed) to the Tangerang Express after attending the inauguration of  Buddhi Dharma University."  —Мандичка YO 😜 22:23, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * The thing is, I'm not arguing that this doesn't exist at all. I am arguing that it may not be a genuine, accreditred university. The mayor would come out to a ceremony because mayors love ceremonies and taking credit for anything that may bring money to town. Their website is so sketchy, it looks like they mainly just used stock images of college-age kids and campus-like buildings and stiched them together, that's what makes me believe this may not be all it's cracked up to be. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:27, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I think the website is typical of a website of a university for a religious minority (>2%) in a relatively poor country. This is the website for the previous university that goes up until the merging. The orange building in the photo is not a stock pic - it matches lots of photos and also  this video. And this  is apparently an American who attends, and I don't get the feeling this video is part of a scam, or that he's being scammed by doing his Buddhist studying at a degree mill.  —Мандичка YO 😜 22:42, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * PS Also the website states that it is part of "akreditasi BAN-PT" which translates to "National Accreditation Board of Higher Education" for Indonesia  —Мандичка YO 😜 22:47, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * If that stands up then I agree that it is a "keep" but I am still concerned by how little we can actually verify here so I'd certainly recommend removing all content that is not, and can not be, reliably referenced which might not leave much. --DanielRigal (talk) 23:02, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * What other information are you looking to verify? Here is an article about the official opening. —Мандичка YO 😜 00:16, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I find it hard to tell what sources are RS here, not being familiar with the area, but I think this is probably OK. My ongoing verification concern is for the contents of the article. Accordingly, I'll change my !vote to...

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. There seems to be enough coverage to verify the university and support a stub or short article but it needs to be referenced properly with any unverifiable elements removed. --DanielRigal (talk) 09:02, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete Lack of RS and fails GNG. (yes, there are a handful of sources, but I wouldn't characterize any of them as RS) LavaBaron (talk) 16:27, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. Poor article but looks to be a genuine university, which we always keep. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:51, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:23, 9 June 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 03:34, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - Heyyouoverthere (talk) 23:14, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep The university is notable enough to keep. Maduwanwela (talk) 16:33, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete: besides its own website, there are no other reliable sources to establish the notability of this university.  T ru  c o  503 07:35, 27 June 2015 (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.