Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Labour india


 * 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 (minimal independent sources that go beyond directory listing). Espresso Addict 01:16, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Labour india

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This page has been repeatedly recreated and deleted as spam under this title and Labour India. The current version is not spam, in my opinion. The issue remains of whether the publishing company is truly notable under Wikipedia standards. I think there's enough about a school (which is a special case for notability) that this article asserts notability, but I don't know if it establishes it. There is no notability guideline on schools, but I think traditionally we don't keep small private boarding schools like this. This is the only press coverage I could find. chaser - t 05:17, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete (as original speedy tagger) unless we can establish notability via references. So far we only have self-published sources.  --Jayron32| talk | contribs  05:20, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Please see the [Labour India Gurukulam Public Shool http://www.gurukulam.com/], [Labour India International Gurukulam School http://www.labourindiahrd.com/] --Avinesh Jose 05:31, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Again, these are self-published sources. Do you have any references that show anyone NOT associated with this group has published extensive information about them?--Jayron32| talk | contribs  05:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

check this also, I am trying to get more and more also. --Avinesh Jose 05:35, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Press releases are items written by the organization itself and released to the press. This is still written by Labour India and still does not show that anyone unassociated with it has cared enough to make them notable--Jayron32| talk | contribs  05:37, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * then what about [this], [this] and this]do you know the first link belongs to Government of India? Avinesh Jose 05:51, 16 October 2007 (UTC)]
 * All of these sites establish that the group exists. Merely existing is not enough to warrent a Wikipedia article.  They amount to a telephone directory.  Again, please read the guidelines such as WP:N and WP:CORP; they ask for non-trivial information.  The first site you link seems to be the results of a track meet, the second and third are merely directory information.  In WP:CORP, for example, the following items can NOT be used to establish notability: Press releases; autobiographies; advertising for the company, corporation, organization, or group; and other works where the company, corporation, organization, or group talks about itself—whether published by the company, corporation, organization, or group itself, or re-printed by other people and Works carrying merely trivial coverage; such as (for examples) newspaper articles that simply report meeting times or extended shopping hours, or the publications of telephone numbers, addresses, and directions in business directories. are NOT considered enough to establish that a group is NOTABLE.  They merely establish that a group EXISTS, which is not the minimum threshold for a Wikipedia article.  What we need are EXTENSIVE and INDEPENDANT evidence that this group is notable enough that people unassociated with the group have written about it.  I still don't see any of that.--Jayron32| talk | contribs  18:18, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete non-article. CRGreathouse (t | c) 00:20, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Pls Dont Delete. atleast pay respect to this, this one is an Educational Research Center.that too No.1 in Kerala. --Avinesh Jose 09:37, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete spam for nn company. Carlossuarez46 04:13, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete The individual secondary schools it runs are probably notable, as almost all high schools are. Possibly the center is. The publishing company publishes exam reviews and the like--its "journals" do not seem to be true periodicals, but student diaries or portfolios or course guides. I doubt it is notable. The company as a whole? Probably not, for it has to be judged among other such companies and it seems rather small for that--at least we need some evidence otherwise. DGG (talk) 11:44, 20 October 2007 (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.