Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Handbook of Universities


 * 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. Likely a hoax. seems to be here only to spam links to this website. Deleted and user indefinitely blocked.  Sandstein  10:59, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

International Handbook of Universities

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Was deprodded without rational or improvement. This is a handbook published by UNESCO, not an organization. As a handbook, no indication it is notable.  Onel 5969  TT me 11:35, 28 March 2017 (UTC) The site is not harmfull, it offers International Handbook of Universities free access. Also found on Google APP store, with all publications for free Taesulkim (talk) 20:00, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. The .vg citations bother me. UNESCO's web site is UNESCO.org. I could not find any link to unesco.vg from UNESCO.org, and there are indications that unesco.vg is not a safe web site. I think this is a hoax, possibly to promote an intentionally harmful web site. This is the information on the real UNESCO web site about International Handbook of Universities, stating that the real IHU (I doubt this is the same publication) is NOT a UNESCO publication and not associated with UNESCO - they merely have a copy in their library. The British Virgin Islands National Commission for UNESCO has a page at http://www.bvi.gov.vg/departments/bvi-national-commission-unesco which does not mention unesco.vg. The phone number in the whois lookup for the web site is a Miami, Florida number (phone number for a company that registers international domain names), whereas the phone number for the real BVI National Commission for UNESCO has a British Virgin Islands number. With the only references being this dubious web site, verifiability is lacking. Jack N. Stock (talk) 03:14, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Do not Delete.
 * Delete- Weirdly promotional tone, badly sourced, and the research done by Jacknstock makes me wonder if this is even legitimate. Reyk  YO!  08:26, 6 April 2017 (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.