Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nexford University


 * 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. Well, that's quite the damning source analysis. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 23:23, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Nexford University

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This fails WP:NCORP, which is what it is. A for profit "university" that is unaccredited is a business and does not fall under what we on Wikipedia consider a school in terms of WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES etc... the only sources are either unreliable, blatant PR, listings or black hat SEO spam. Praxidicae (talk) 13:05, 6 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep:The article is not a black hat SEO or spam. It is an educational University. And the article is regularly monitored by ElKevbo since it was published. Rest depends on the discussion by other editors. Jai49 (talk) 13:51, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * BS. Not a single source here is independent coverage. this is pr garbage, this is paid pr spam, this isn't coverage and this is written by their "start up leader" Praxidicae (talk) 14:30, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:56, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:56, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:56, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Here are examples of sources that do mention the university which could be used:


 * http://venturesafrica.com/clayton-christensen-an-inspiration-behind-nexford-universitys-innovative-online-model/
 * https://thenationonlineng.net/building-skills-for-jobs-entrepreneurship/
 * https://www.accessmba.com/school/nexford-university
 * https://punchng.com/sterling-bank-ibm-nexford-varsity-to-empower-students/
 * https://www.forbes.com/sites/theyec/2019/03/20/10-entrepreneurs-share-their-most-important-early-business-decisions/#403d7797479b
 * https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/challenger-universities-pt-3a-university-landscape-mario-barosevcic/?trackingId=a9JfLyTPSVmVpPhJudy17Q%3D%3D
 * https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/challenger-universities-pt-1-does-higher-educations-2tn-barosevcic/?trackingId=F6Cb6HjaTiSfX42N0QXWBA%3D%3D
 * https://medium.com/emerge-edtech-insights/does-higher-educations-2tn-global-market-have-space-for-something-new-794feeef5522
 * https://medium.com/emerge-edtech-insights/challenger-universities-pt-3a-the-challenger-university-landscape-f7300bce7db2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.90.65.104 (talk) 12:23, 14 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Weak keep The institution isn't accredited in the United States so we need to turn to the available sources to determine if this subject is otherwise notable. One of the sources included in the current article was written by the founder of the institution so it's not a very good source for establishing notability although it should still count for something considering that it's not self-published. I don't know anything about the other sources cited in the article; a quick glance doesn't throw any immediate red flags and I'm being generous in my !vote by assuming that they're reliable. If that isn't the case, my !vote would change to delete unless other sources can be provided. ElKevbo (talk) 15:15, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Which sources in this article are independent coverage, ? Praxidicae (talk) 15:19, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Praxidicae, I have added few references, These must be independent reliable such as nipc.gov and Pitchbook, Forbes and many others. Jai49 (talk) 04:46, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I would expect someone of your tenure to know better. this isn't reliable and it isn't independent. The government website is also not independent coverage. It's a listing. Governments aren't in the business of journalism. Praxidicae (talk) 12:13, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: More source analysis would help
 * Delete as a WP:CORP/WP:ORG failure. None of the cited sources meet the WP:ORGDEPTH standard.  An independent search only finds more sponsored content.  The school's UK-based accrediting agency has a spotty record for vetting institutions.  That tips the balance for me against giving it a pass as an independently-accredited degree-granting institution. • Gene93k (talk) 15:39, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 22:18, 14 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete - Non-notable organisation. Source analysis above. --Jack Frost (talk) 11:50, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable university, founded just two years ago, and lacking any evidence of notability. GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 12:31, 22 May 2020 (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.