Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/College of Biblical Studies (2nd nomination)


 * 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   keep. postdlf (talk) 21:38, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

College of Biblical Studies
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No indication of notability. Article written by the organization themselves by a shared account (since blocked). No references other than their own website. Just another religious school. Went to AfD previously: Articles for deletion/College of Biblical Studies. Result was Delete. Alexf(talk) 11:56, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - as nom. I do not see reliable links aside from their own website that show anything worthy of inclusion. It is a commercial venture, one of many thousand others in the same business. -- Alexf(talk) 12:02, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * It is in fact an accredited four-year college, thus passing WP:NSCHOOL, and is nonprofit rather than "a commercial venture." -- 101.119.15.110 (talk) 04:15, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 13:35, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 13:36, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 13:36, 2 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep as is usual with degree-awarding institutions. The previous AfD was seven years ago, when we possibly hadn't established this as a general rule. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:01, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep as a legitimate and accredited degree-awarding institution. There seems to be a failure of WP:BEFORE here. -- 101.119.15.110 (talk) 01:13, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: the article creator has been blocked indefinitely by the nom for promotion. However, that doesn't mean this isn't a suitable article; legitimate degree-awarding institutions should have articles, per WP:NSCHOOL. -- 101.119.15.110 (talk) 02:11, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
 * You are correct. It does not mean the same for the article. The OP was promoting. The article was not written in an overly promotional way (unlike the previous version), so it was not set for CSD G11. As I am not convinced of its notability here we are after a short PROD period. That is how the process works. Now lets see the consensus. As for WP:NSCHOOL all it is, is a reminder that all schools must satisfy the notability guidelines. The guideline in a nutshell amounts to this: A company, corporation, organization, school, team, religion, group, product, or service is notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in secondary sources. Such sources must be reliable, and independent of the subject. A single independent source is almost never sufficient for demonstrating the notability of an organization. I did not see them, so that is why we are here. -- Alexf(talk) 10:25, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
 * You did not see the independent sources, but they existed, and are in the article now. The college also appears in several other handbooks listing accredited colleges and universities. And standard practice is that "most independently accredited degree-awarding institutions and high schools are being kept except when zero independent sources can be found to prove that the institution actually exists" per WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. I must say, I'm astonished at this nomination. -- 101.119.14.4 (talk) 11:03, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Good. So the system works. That is what AfDs are for. Thanks for your contribution. -- Alexf(talk) 12:00, 3 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep -- We treat all high schools as notable. I thus fail to see how a theological college with 1200 students could fail to be notable.  If this were a department of a local church offering evening classes to church memebrs and others, I would take the opposite view.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:55, 4 October 2013 (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.