Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kakaraparthi BhavaNarayana 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 keep.  MBisanz  talk 01:54, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Kakaraparthi BhavaNarayana College

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Has multiple aging maintenance tags, is way to promotional in tone, and notability cannot be established. Boomer VialHolla! We gonna ball! 07:10, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   18:31, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   18:32, 7 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Snow keep as per WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES, and the precedent of keeping articles on degree-awarding institutions as long as they are verifiable by independent sources. This is also a reasonably old institution, and several articles in The Hindu and The Hans India has covered this college (e.g.,, , , , , , etc.). Just because the article is promotional (or has other issues) doesn't mean that it ought to be deleted; see WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP.  Please stop nominating articles you don't like for deletion. — Stringy Acid (talk) 19:06, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Weak delete per WP:TNT, beginning "Kakaraparthi Bhavanarayana College is truly a dream come true for many..." and going on from there, it really is irredeemable in its current form, and there is really nothing much worth keeping, I'd say. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:12, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:13, 8 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep All it needs is cleanup. Rather than wasting time on a deletion nomination why not just remove the promotional puffery? AusLondonder (talk) 20:26, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment I have now performed a major cleanup of the article which obviously should have been done by the nom per WP:BEFORE. AusLondonder (talk) 20:39, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep as a degree-awarding institution per longstanding precedent and consensus. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:35, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep The college exists and is genuine. --Artene50 (talk) 21:04, 14 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.