Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National Integrated 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. Black Kite (talk) 18:22, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

National Integrated College

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Normally, schools are deemed automatically notable; but this one has remained unsourced for over three years now. Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  23:40, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:34, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:34, 21 September 2014 (UTC)


 * The proper remedy for an unsourced article is to add sources, not to nominate it for deletion. Did you conduct a search for such sources, as required by WP:BEFORE? According to that page, "If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a candidate for AfD." -71.112.198.23 (talk) 02:29, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep – Educational institutions are notable --Hackerboyas (Talk) 05:51, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Is this policy? Can you point me to it? —&#91;  Alan M 1  (talk) &#93;— 08:12, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The second bullet point at WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES is the relevant one. AllyD (talk) 08:48, 21 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep: Highbeam (subscription reqd) turns up mention in two articles from Kathmandu Post, one about an ex-student, one about the institution's participation in a wider event . Neither is worth adding to the article, but they do provide verification; no reason for this not to follow the normal outcome for such articles. AllyD (talk) 06:38, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete: Highbeam has just two mentions – one only indirectly as the result of a student, and the other about a fair for Nepali secondary schools. Neither mentions the school in the opening three paragraphs visible without subscription. Google search turns up social media, automatic-inclusion lists, self-published stuff like job openings, and indirect mentions in résumés, etc. I can't find anything that could be used to add any useful content to the article or cite as a source for anything other than maybe its rough address. WP:NSCHOOL is confusing (as to the meaning of "this guideline"), but seems to mean it must pass either WP:NGO or WP:GNG. I say it passes neither. —&#91;   Alan M 1  (talk) &#93;— 08:12, 21 September 2014 (UTC)(edit) WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES says that consensus is that there must be evidence that it simply exists and operates, which seems to be true. I don't know what purpose an article like this serves, but the precedent seems clear. Changing my vote (with objection). —&#91;   Alan M 1  (talk) &#93;— 17:19, 22 September 2014 (UTC)(edit 2) WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES says "most ... outcomes" and also that it is only an essay and when it conflicts with policy or guidelines, to respect the latter. WP:ORGSIG seems to directly contradict it, with "No company or organization is considered inherently notable. No organization is exempt from this requirement, no matter what kind of organization it is, including schools. If the individual organization has received no or very little notice from independent sources, then it is not notable simply because other individual organizations of its type are commonly notable or merely because it exists". In the 13 years its been open, it's been mentioned just twice (and only indirectly and as a member of a larger group of schools) that we can find. In the 3 years its been tagged as requiring more sources, nobody has found any, nor found any information to expand it beyond a one-line stub. There is, of course, nothing keeping it from being created again if things change. —&#91;   Alan M 1  (talk) &#93;— 17:56, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep as a verified secondary school per longstanding consensus and precedent. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:39, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - this college educates up to and including Bachelor degree level that puts it at a higher status than, for example, US high schools that are generally considered notable. It is hardly surprising that not many sources can be found on the Internet in English for a school in Nepal! To avoid systemic bias local sources in the Nepali language should be examined. When, as here,we have a likely notable subject we don't delete rather we seek improvement. The Whispering Wind (talk) 00:22, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
 * That had occurred to me. I looked at the school's website to get its name in Nepali (or Newari) and found their website to be entirely in English (even the masthead and logo), which is somewhat unusual, and indicates to me that their primary language of instruction is English. I would therefore expect coverage in English sources. Still, I searched for "राष्ट्रिय एकीकृत" which is what Google Translate came up with for "National Integrated" in Nepali. "College" did not translate, though it showed an alternate of कलेज, similar to the Hindi कॉलेज. Bing Translate doesn't have Nepali, but "राष्ट्रीय एकीकृत कॉलेज" in Hindi. Searches of various combinations of these yielded pages that, when translated back to English, were unrelated to the school (though did usually contain "national integrated"). Perhaps someone can comment on the correct name of the school in Nepali? Or Newari? There appears to be significant internet presence of Nepali media, so I don't think it's unreasonable to expect to find coverage. —&#91;  Alan M 1  (talk) &#93;— 02:34, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Though it is college of Nepal, it uses its English name. Many of the colleges use English names such as: Liverpool International College, Prime College, Barsha College and so on. Finding sources regarding the schools and colleges of Nepal are much harder as there are less websites (noted to be reliable on wikipedia). As the above user found source of HSEB affiliation, it credibly indicates notability. Hackerboyas (Talk) 02:48, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
 * As you have asked its Nepali translation, it would be राष्ट्रिय एकीकृत कलेज, the word college is just written in Devanagari script and is a agantuk word (copied from other languages than Sanskrit). Hackerboyas (Talk) 03:16, 24 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks. So it is as I searched it, both with and without the "loan word" for college. I still didn't find anything relevant. Perhaps someone who reads Nepali can verify (i.e. search for "राष्ट्रिय एकीकृत कलेज" and see if you find anything that qualifies as an WP:RS). As far as HSEB affiliation, it seems likely that, just like other places in the world, being a member of such an organization is a requirement, not an option. How many similar schools are not members? Between the issues with the encoding of the HSEB spreadsheets and the bad links on their site(s), I had to give up, and was unable to even verify their affiliation. —&#91;  Alan M 1  (talk) &#93;— 20:43, 26 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Check this out: Check the PDF Affiliated HSS 2069/70
 * You can find in 3192, college code: 7622 -- निक उ.मा.वी which is short form written in Nepali language &mdash; NIC. This proves it is affiliated to HSEB. Cheers! Hackerboyas (Talk) 02:18, 27 September 2014 (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.