Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cordova Academy


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 21:48, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Cordova Academy

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

For the same reasons I mentioned in Mohamed Jebara, and because there is no indication that this institution meets the notability criteria. Board55 (talk) 19:36, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - as with the other article, no indication of notablity, all "sources" self-referential pablo hablo. 23:05, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - The Academy has not received significant coverage in reliable sources, and therefore does not meet the notability requirement. --Megaboz (talk) 23:39, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Per nom and Megaboz. This has the looks of an incipient WP:WALL.--Eric Yurken (talk) 02:09, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Allegations Untrue: Notable community newspapers and other websites cited —Preceding unsigned comment added by An-Nadeem (talk • contribs) 23:16, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * User Board55 Has not contributed anything to Wikipedia: Please, note that user Board55 has made no contributions to Wikipedia, their first and sole acts have been trying to have my articles deleted under false and unfounded allegations. User Board55 has not specified under which article of Wikipedia's deletion policy their false allegations stand.  Their first so called 'contribution' to Wikipedia was made at 19:31 on March 1, 2009, and that action was the unfounded act of wanting my articles deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by An-Nadeem (talk • contribs) 23:16, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - As IP editors cannot nominate an article for deletion, the fact that the one and only action of this registered account may be due to the desire on the part of the editor to nominate for deletion, and not some other nefarious purpose. Sourcing int he article is very weak.  The references are not to specific articles, but rather the main website.  That's useless for sourcing as it tells us nothing.  My own search for sources turn up nothing. -- Whpq (talk) 17:48, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * delete per Megaboz, no evidence of the extensive coverage in reliable secondary sources required to meet WP:N. Pete.Hurd (talk) 21:36, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Question This academy is supposed to have been founded by Jebara in 1994. According to his bio, he was born in 1981, so he was 13 at the time Cordova Academy was founded. Is this really serious? --Crusio (talk) 11:02, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

The Academy was not fully established in 1994. Rather it was FOUNDED in 1994. There are students (many of them) who have studied with him during this time. Please see his website: http://cordovaacademy.com/biography_imam_mohamad_jebara_arabic_tajwid.aspx, and you will find that it is written:

''' While at their home, the family inquired about Mohamad's religious education. Impressed by his knowledge at such a youthful age, they asked him to begin teaching them and their extended family and friends. Soon, Mohamad, just twelve years old, would be teaching many in his neighborhood, he had a class of 60 ladies, with their children. They had weekly classes crammed in a small townhouse. This was the dawn of Mohamad's teaching career.''' --Hafsah02 (talk) 16:27, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Hafsah02 (talk • contribs) 16:22, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Lastly, in regards to what was mentioned about the references not going back to specific articles, I wanted to direct your attention to 3 articles:

http://www.muslimlink.ca/downloads/07oct.pdf -- page 15

http://www.muslimlink.ca/downloads/08jun.pdf -- page 2

http://www.muslimlink.ca/downloads/07dec.pdf -- page 26

The last 2 talk about the founder, the first one talks about the Academy and states:

the Cordova Academy has been in operation in an informal capacity since its inception in 1994, and officially since 2005 --Hafsah02 (talk) 20:06, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Somebody teaching at home is not an academy. The exagerated claims in this article and the arguiments being brought forward by the "keep" !votes convince me that there is not enough notability here to meet WP:N. --Crusio (talk) 08:53, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Somebody teaching at another person's home is an academy if they are teaching under that name. The fact remains that it has never been argued that Cordova Academy was a full established academy in 1994. I have already quoted the reference for that above written by staff writer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.241.136.114 (talk) 13:59, 5 March 2009 (UTC)   --Hafsah02 (talk) 14:03, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I have removed my contribution to wikipedia since you people seem to be so vigorously against my articles, I have removed their entire content. Please, use your time to contribute to the betterment of this world instead of wasting your time indulging in and slandering something you have no knowledge about. I am truly sorry that wikipedia is like this, I actually though it had some academic weight to it.  I have lost all respect for its so called credibility. A person who contributed nothing to it sparked all this, due to some envy they may harbor for this great institution and its honorable founder. Dear Moderator, please delete all my contributions to Wikipedia immediately and let everyone get on with their lives. an-Nadeem  —Preceding undated comment added 17:47, 5 March 2009 (UTC).
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:03, 6 March 2009 (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.