Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jitna Devi Inter College


 * 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. Courcelles (talk) 00:01, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Jitna Devi Inter College

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Appears to be a non-existing inter college. Coordinates take us to meadow. Two 404 links and one link which has no connection with this college whatsoever. — ☮ JAaron95  Talk   17:34, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. — ☮  JAaron95  Talk   18:28, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. — ☮  JAaron95  Talk   18:28, 21 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - fails WP:V, subject to later re-creation if and when good sources can be found. Bearian (talk) 20:26, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:24, 25 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete for failing WP:V. I can't find a trace of this school outside Wikipedia. This article was created by a new and somewhat prolific editor. Some contributions by this editor are unsourced but apparently real. So I'm not ready to call this a hoax. • Gene93k (talk) 19:51, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Additional comment. I now think this is a hoax. Expertly edited but completely bogus. Other contributions by this editor are troubling: Bachuwapar (exists but details are verifiably false), SLJB Girls Inter College (no evidence of existence), Bharatiya Bhawan Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya, Rajesultanpur (no evidence of existence), Taj News (may be partially true but not finding reliable sources to verify) and Living India (may be partially true but not finding reliable sources to verify). • Gene93k (talk) 23:58, 25 September 2015 (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.