Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Instituto Tecnologico Superior Aeronautico


 * 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. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 02:53, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Instituto Tecnologico Superior Aeronautico

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Horridly unintelligible crap about a seemingly minor agency, the notability of which is not established through multiple, independent sources. Biruitorul Talk 04:24, 21 November 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 00:56, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Badly written, presumably by non-native speaker.  But concerns a government run university that is inherently notable.  LotLE × talk  09:19, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, we know the mantra: "all government agencies are notable". But why? You're making a rather substantial claim there, that all the world's thousands of government agencies &mdash; not ministries, but agencies &mdash; automatically deserve articles here, WP:GNG and even WP:V notwithstanding. Colour me sceptical. If someone wants to restart them once they're gone from proper sources - which will have to be done regardless - fine, but as of now, there is no evidence of notability beyond the mantra. - Biruitorul Talk 14:53, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and rewriter. It's a government sponsored technical    college, and notable as such, like all other institutes of higher education I am not quite sure of the equivalent level--I think a US junior college. . But quite a bit of it is promotional, not suprising since a good deal is a crude translation of its website . Just calling it a "govenment agency" shows a certain amount of unfamiliarity with the article and the link.    DGG ( talk ) 05:51, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
 * 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.