Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dakshinee


 * 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 (WP:NPASR). King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 04:26, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Dakshinee

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The subject is not notable as per WP:ORG, WP:MUSIC, or WP:GNG. There is clear lack of significant coverage. There is only one short article in the city-specific newspaper which talks about the subject trivially (that too in an opinion section). Other references are taken from either letter-to-the-editor section of some newspaper or non-reliable website. In short, it fails to satisfy WP:PSTS.

Some editors who removed previous PROD requests may have missed WP:ORGSIG point. It is clearly mentioned: "No company or organization is considered inherently notable. No organization is exempt from this requirement, no matter what kind of organization it is, including schools".

Additionally, none of the information mentioned in the article can be verified as per WP:V. Also, as pointed out by other editors, it looks like a case of self-promotion that violates WP:PROMOTION guidelines. Uvarun2009 (talk) 18:07, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep the article has been edited so it is not promotional and actually has serious criticism of the teaching methods and the references to newspaper letters have been removed. The productions of the institution have been reviewed in reliable sources and as the institution was first set up in 1948, there are very likely offline or paywalled reliable sources and overall as most higher schools are kept at AFD regardless of guidelines or RFC see this recent discussion this article should be kept IMHO, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 19:45, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
 * WP:PROMOTION was just an additional point behind my deletion nomination. The key point was (and is) notability. A few more points on why I stand by my original decision: a) I think it is clear from the article that this is just a music organization with no proper accreditation. So, it is not really a elementary/middle/high school. Hence, any discussion on those kind of "real" schools has no relevance here. Additionally, any random discussion (where many valid arguments were made by the editors opposing the motion) with no consensus can hardly supersede an established guideline of Wikipedia. b)That the institution exists since 1948 is not verifiable to start with. Moreover, it does not matter. It is clearly mentioned on Wikipedia organization notability guideline: "The existence of multiple significant independent sources needs to be demonstrated. Hypothetical sources (e.g. "the company is big/old/important so there must be more sources, I just don't have/can't find them") do not count towards the notability requirement." c) I would like to elaborate on my concern on the lack of significant coverage from independent sources. The two articles from the same newspaper should be considered as the single source, as per the Multiple Source guideline on WP:ORGIND. And bolobolo.co.uk should not even considered as any kind of source on Wikipedia. d) None of the articles are a feature story on the organization. Some are simple passing mentions. Others just talk about some local events briefly where the organization is mentioned. This looks like a classic case of trivial coverage, as it essentially comes under "coverage of purely local events, incidents, controversies". e) An additional point: most of the information mentioned in the article are not verifiable from any secondary source. Hence, at the end, I believe that the article should be deleted. --Uvarun2009 (talk) 09:50, 10 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 12:41, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 12:41, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 12:41, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 20:35, 16 May 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 07:42, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment - While I am not an expert, this might be a well known organisation in Kolkata. I will look for sources and see if I can find any editor who is a native speaker of Bengali.--DreamLinker (talk) 13:01, 29 May 2018 (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.