Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LNG Academy


 * 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. Patar knight - chat/contributions 01:54, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

LNG Academy

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Either this is a non-notable division or unit within a non-notable school or it's a non-notable educational program run by some company. Tagged as non-notable for 3 years, it's mentioned as being affiliated with a school/company that is redlink, and the only ref is to a company that appears to host this program. DMacks (talk) 06:02, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:22, 5 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Badak LNG. A passing mention there is about all that this WP:GNG-failing educational programme deserves. --HyperGaruda (talk) 08:16, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note, I deleted that target article because I agreed with User:DGG's WP:CSD tagging of it (after I removed all the copyvio content, even with which it seemed still A7ish and also promotional). That article (creation, and later copyvio insertion) and the creation of the here-nom'ed article, were all by the same editor. I smell COI-promotion. DMacks (talk) 04:13, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Here we go: editor self-identifies as business development officer and intern at the parent company. DMacks (talk) 07:58, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete in that case, per failing WP:GNG in independent sources and per WP:NOTPROMO. --HyperGaruda (talk) 07:15, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. North America1000 19:52, 5 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. as an attempted second promotional article on LNG group. There might conceivably be a possibility for a proper article on the group,if someonewithout COI would write it,but there doesn't seem to be enough information readily available to decide.  DGG ( talk ) 06:45, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * The above deletion debate is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.