Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Medical School for International Health


 * 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 Stubify and keep (non-admin closure), my issue was more with the various copyvios from primary sources than the notability of the subject. I feel the article is fine now, so I retract. ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk | Contribs) 02:11, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Medical School for International Health

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

School with no assertion of notability. All the content is a direct copy and paste from a primary source. The ones I could quickly find are, here, here. I'd bet the rest of the content is a copy and paste too. There is no clean version to revert to. ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk | Contribs) 16:29, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions.   —• Gene93k (talk) 19:21, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.   —• Gene93k (talk) 19:21, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Stubify and start over. Legitimate higher ed institutions are inherently notable per editor consensus. If this isn't going to be speedied per G12/copyvio, it is also notable by 3rd-party coverage (and occasional controversy). • Gene93k (talk) 19:40, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - I agree and done. TerriersFan (talk) 01:50, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment: This entry was modified slightly to reflect facts about the school relevant to prospective student. It was modified without inflamatory language (though many would say it would have been justified). When this material was added, the entry was immediately truncated to 5 lines - in order to avoid a more objective entry than the admin would like. I beleive the entry should remain with both positives and negatives, and that the people responsible for trunkating it should be banned from modifying it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.109.59.101 (talk) 22:32, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I looked over your edits to the page, which lead me to seeing the copyright violation. Though I won't assume those who removed your contributions intentions, there are some issue with them. Primarily, Wikipedia is not a guide for helping prospective students. Additionally your contributions appear to be original research/unverified which are core content guidelines. -- ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk | Contribs) 23:44, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Just taking a quick scan of the article history. Seems to be substantial removal of material prior to nomination for AfD. Earlier versions of article may be better starting point to try and fix this? This school is likely notable and you have to ask yourself can this subject become a stand alone article? Articles for deletion is also useful. Sting au  Buzz Me...   23:52, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Just created a shortcut for that. Now WP:BEFORE should work just fine. Sting au  Buzz Me...   00:08, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I looked over every edit to that page before nominating. Before this edit by (the IP with the above comment) all but a few sentences weren't copy and pasted from a primary source, which is a copyvio and non neutral. Then that IP reverted back and forth between a few IPs that removed most of the article. Eventually one of them kept replacing the page with some stuff from a pdf by one of the school's affiliates. I believe as the article is now just contains the additions by 84.109.59.101, which as I stated above contains issues. -- ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk | Contribs) 00:19, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - the AfD'd page contained material added by IP 84.109.59.101 as he says above "modified slightly to reflect facts about the school relevant to prospective student". Whether this is negative or realistic material is a matter of judgement and opinion. I have reverted to the earlier, clean version since the additions are, in any case, unsourced. Tertiary institutions have long been accepted as notable. TerriersFan (talk) 01:33, 20 February 2008 (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.