Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SMV Academy


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:31, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

SMV Academy

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable academy. Pure promotional page about a training institute. Although Google hits return results there is not a single third party ref found to establish notability. Lakun.patra (talk) 16:34, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Lakun.patra (talk) 16:34, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Lakun.patra (talk) 16:34, 30 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. No independent coverage cited. Article looks like promotion that's veiled just enough to avoid CSD G11. —C.Fred (talk) 17:03, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete, probably speedy: A WP:SPA article on a firm providing training in web design and SEO. Note the Talk page which is effectively pure advertising. No encyclopaedic notability claimed or demonstrated. I am going to flag this CSD A7/G11. AllyD (talk) 20:43, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
 * It's an educational institution, so A7 is not applicable. I'm leaving the G11 tag up for others to review, though, since I think that's a judgment call. —C.Fred (talk) 20:47, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, I would make a distinction between a recognised education institution - which is certainly A7-exempt - and a training shop which is purely a firm trying to sell its wares. But one way or another, it is a use of Wikipedia to promote. AllyD (talk) 20:52, 30 December 2015 (UTC)


 * I have declined the G11 speedy delete, and instead cut out the promotional text. So it is now half the size. Without any independent references, I think this may have to be deleted. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:07, 31 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete No good sources on checking the links or additionally running a quick Indian newspaper check. And is so dishearteningly filled with problems that it further undermines any idea of a notable operation. FeatherPluma (talk) 06:52, 31 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete No indication this is anything other than a tech academy. No indication of degree or diploma granting. To quote Frank Zappa, "Strictly commercial". John from Idegon (talk) 09:24, 31 December 2015 (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.