Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PEARL Institute of Management & Information Technology, Quetta


 * 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   no consensus. Shimeru (talk) 05:09, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

PEARL Institute of Management & Information Technology, Quetta
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Not clear how this private institute might meet notability guidelines. Provided references are either primary ones, broken, or of unclear reliability. The complex name might be a factor but I'm having difficulty finding sources for this article. Reads like spam. RadioFan (talk) 20:36, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose: According to WP:UNI guideline, "all colleges and universities are notable and should be included on Wikipedia". It is an accredited degree granting institute according to the Pakistan Higher education commission, affiliated to Virtual University, Lahore. That said, the article is presently in a terrible shape, and needs major re-work, there's also issue of the article creator themselves making unconstructive edits.  S Pat   talk 21:01, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The same guideline (WP:UNI/AG) also says that [i]t is also important to bear in mind that anyone can set up an institution and call it a "college" or, in many countries, a "university", so that it is essential to be clear whether an institution actually merits such a description. The article's references all link to the organization's homepage and Google returns almost no results for "PEARL Institute of Management and Information". Personally, I'd like to see at least one secondary source. — Rankiri (talk) 22:25, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I think because of the accredition by Pakistan Higher Education Commission and the affiliation, it makes sense to call this a "college". As for secondary sources, I think this is a case of systemic bias, the region is a bit technologically backwards, and hence it should be difficult to find online secondary sources. I have found a passing reference in a news release, and one in a blog. I am posting a message on WP:Pakistan to ask for help.  S Pat   talk 22:47, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

aticle has been improved with references and external links —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davetobin (talk • contribs) 14:15, 1 April 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  00:27, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  —• Gene93k (talk) 00:53, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:53, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. The references don't provide significant secondary coverage of the subject and I couldn't find better sources myself. If the article gets deleted, the author should take a look at WP:AFTERDELETE. — Rankiri (talk) 15:52, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 02:29, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep it seems to have a real staff and real existence & is authorized to grant degrees.  DGG ( talk ) 21:14, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
 * 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.