Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conférence des Directeurs des Écoles Françaises d'Ingénieurs


 * 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. (non-admin closure)  →TSU tp* 08:19, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Conférence des Directeurs des Écoles Françaises d'Ingénieurs

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

The schools and institutions controlled by this agency may very well be notable, but nothing I have read in the references for this organization gives me any impression that the administration is the same. At the bear minimum, this needs merging out into another article, which would cover it, at the most it needs deleting. As a separate agency, I don't see its general notability.

BarkingFish 01:26, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs)  02:14, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs)  02:14, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 02:18, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

*Delete per WP:Article Titles, when is the last time you used Conférence, des, Directeurs, Écoles, Françaises, or d'Ingénieurs in normal conversation? If you have? I need to stay away from your clique. WP:Article Titles says "is commonly used by English language." Beyond that, the cites are the article.  :- ) Don 04:30, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Plenty of references available, particularly when one searches the acronym rather than the full name. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 02:29, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep per Eastmain and include more info from the French language article, including info which supports notability. I renamed it Conference of the Directors of French Engineering Schools to address the PROD reason WP:Article Titles.  —  Jeff G. ツ  (talk)   02:35, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

08:00 section break

 * Keep as notable. Though this is not really relevant to the AFD, the use of the English title seems absurd - we retain the actual name (ie French) of such institutions, École nationale d'administration, Institut national des études territoriales, École Normale Supérieure, etc, for the good reason that is how they are known either by title or acronym. I cannot imagine why we would translate these in normal use except as part of an explanation if what they were. Of itself the translated name is meaningless. --AJHingston (talk) 08:05, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Totally agree with AJHingston. Very notable and the use of English title is absurd. There are a lot of articles on English Wikipedia concerning French Education with a French title, which is normal because it is their official name. See for example : category:grandes écoles. 80.13.85.217 (talk) 09:15, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I renamed it because of your PROD. If it survives AfD, I would have no problem with reversing that rename. I technically cannot do that myself.  —  Jeff G. ツ  (talk)   11:30, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 'Your' PROD is ambiguous. There may have been a misunderstanding. There is some guidance here, but where the article title is a proper name the correct thing is to use the version most commonly used in English. So Arc de Triomphe not Triumphal Arch, but Eiffel Tower not La Tour Eiffel. It is difficult to imagine anyone looking this subject up using anything other than the proper name or its acronym, nor is there evidence that it is commonly referred to in English by a translation of the name, so the natural name for the article is the proper, French, one. --AJHingston (talk) 12:34, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry about the attribution. Dcshank PRODded, 80.13.85.217 notified me of the PROD, and I assumed.  —  Jeff G. ツ  (talk)   14:35, 11 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Change to Keep. WP:OSE  If these were UK or American, one-half would be kicked for notability.  But being French, implies importance, at least according to the authors and the titles.  I find very few citations, if any that are independent, mostly just lists of the organizations.  I can't wait for the next paper released by the Conférence des Directeurs des Écoles Françaises d'Ingénieurs, I'm sure I will learn a lot.
 * After looking at a few hundred renown organizations from around the world, it appears there is not a problem, most institutions use English names, with the notable exception of the few French that made the list, and a few other European groups here and there. I propose that the rule be amended that all titles shall be in English or French.(author's choice, if French sound more cool, then French)  I assume that the alphabetizing software is already in place.  I will wait for a notable Chinese of Japanese organization that prefers to stick their nose in the air and use only Mandarin or Kanji.   :- ) Don  13:03, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the levity. Please consider striking your delete !vote, and making your choice of article name unambiguously.  —  Jeff G. ツ  (talk)   14:48, 11 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep. Needs to be changed to all English. French equivalents are irrelevant to the English article. And not because they don't "allow" English to enter French, but just from common sense. The French is distracting. What they do may be of value/interesting. But having to translate it before the reader keeps the reader, and the article, from progressing in knowledge. Not supposed to be a French lesson. Any more than an article about the equivalent board in American/US/Australia or wherever should be an English lesson in the French version of Wikipedia. Student7 (talk) 21:10, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - notable standards setting body. TerriersFan (talk) 20:13, 16 June 2012 (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.