Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greater Kolkata College of Engineering and Management


 * 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. Davewild (talk) 18:26, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Greater Kolkata College of Engineering and Management

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The reason for nominating this article is lack of notable / verifiable source. This also Fails WP:GNG.It is also a case of copyvio bcuz the boys hostel is copy paste of MIT "Simmons Hall, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts.JPG" and the lower part of the article is clearly copied from MIT library description.  Vivekananda De  --tAlK 17:19, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:34, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:34, 19 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - We generally keep legitimate degree granting institutions. The private college ended up shutting down due to student protest after too many were failed . Copyvio issues can be dealt with by editting. -- Whpq (talk) 16:22, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment-Well I might be wrong but "legitimate degree granting" isn't a criteria for notability according to WP:ORG.WP clearly says "An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability. All content must be verifiable. If no independent, third-party, reliable sources can be found on a topic, then Wikipedia should not have an article on it". If you search on google news only one news article about the "shutting down due to student protest" pops up.I sincerely believe this article is non-notable.The copyvio issue is comprises >70 percent of the problem.The "campus" description is copy pasted from MIT, the library description from either MIT or Cambridge, the photos of college library are from Lund University,hostel from MIT Simmons hostel,Elektro builing from Norwegian University of Science and Technology.Even the principals are Edmund Phelps and Jack Steinberger who are noble prize winners and yet check with the sources and the info turns out to be false.Now, if you start deleting every copyvio only few paragraphs remain.I will say again that a college does not need an article just because it exists for "legitimate degree granting".Sorry I may seem harsh to your comments but I need to justify my nomination for AfD. Vivekananda De  --tAlK 06:08, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Reply - I didn't take the comments as harsh. They are a perfectly reasonable response based on policy guideline; exactly the sort of thing all editors discussing deletion should engage in.  I want to make it clear that there are two issues at play, of which only one needs a discussion at AFD.  The copyright issue is one that can be dealt with through editting, and doesn't require discussion at AFD.  In fact, I will go ahead and deal with it momentarily.  The key issue at hand of AFD is whether the article topic meets our inclusion guideline.  I understand that it does not meet WP:ORG.  However, we sometimes ignore all rules.  WP:OUTCOMES is an essay, and not guideline or policy, but it does point out that degree granting institutions are routinely kept.  The reasoning is that they will have coverage in reliable sources (that may not be readily online) by their very nature, and as such should be kept.  -- Whpq (talk) 13:47, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Well thank you for not taking offence.After your edit only the name of the college and logo remains.As I said more than 90 percent had to be deleted.And I have no problem whatsoever in keeping the article in the present form or merging it into West Bengal University of Technology.One thing I would like to point out that the removal of unattributed and untrue facts was only possible due to the efforts of this vandal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:123.236.96.84. You may see that I have also given a warning.The last edit (or vandalism) this IP made to this article was in the form of abusive words against the college management and that too in Bengali language.Incidentally I am also a bengali. Moreover this IP was pointing to the fact that this college was using wikipedia's name for advertisement (not on the net but on brochures or offline material).Thus my intent is to actually thank this vandal.  Vivekananda De  --tAlK  15:00, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think a merge to West Bengal University of Technology would be advisable. The two educational institutions are separate entities and only have some form of affiliation agreement. -- Whpq (talk) 17:35, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note - The article has been stubbified. The entirety of the article was constructed as a mish mash of unattributed material copied from other university articles with most of the "facts" left the same making it both a copyvio, and more or less completely untrue. -- Whpq (talk) 14:16, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 25 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep (not sure why this was relisted after the nominator already stated his approval to keep) Tertiary education institution whose existence is verified by an independent source. Let this develop over time, not be deleted. --Pgallert (talk) 08:12, 26 October 2011 (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.