Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Safir English Language 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. The Bushranger One ping only 08:02, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Safir English Language Academy

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

There aren't any reliable sources listed in the article, and I can't find any online, so I don't think the subject passes WP:CORP. — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 16:50, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Comments (no opinion yet, but the following may help in finding information):
 * The academy's usual name seem to be the "Safir Language Academy" (as it should be: they claim to teach other languages as well).
 * The name in Persian is موسسه سفير گفتمان
 * Their website is gosafir.com.
 * הסרפד (Hasirpad) [formerly Ratz...bo] 23:50, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * הסרפד (Hasirpad) [formerly Ratz...bo] 23:50, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * הסרפד (Hasirpad) [formerly Ratz...bo] 23:50, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete : Not a single independent-looking reference, besides for uncounted directory listings. הסרפד (Hasirpad) [formerly Ratz...bo] 01:29, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Modified to neutral: I missed all the sources In fact found, but I await more input on whether any of these sources imply adequate notability. הסרפד (Hasirpad) [formerly Ratz...bo] 06:29, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep an article about Safir English Language Academy pubilshed in Ferdowsi University of Mashhad. In fact 05:12, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * This is another link In fact 05:22, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * One of the Cambridge ESOL exam centres in Iran. In fact 05:28, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The First International TESOL Persia Conference was held by Safir English Language Academy. In fact 05:30, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi In fact, and thanks for finding all these sources. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like we can use any of them to prove the notability of the school. The first two links you give point to the same paper, English Language Teachers’ Perceptions of Educational Supervision in Relation to Their Professional Development: A Case Study of Iran. If you look at the biographical details of the authors at the end, you can see that one of the authors is also a teacher at the school. This means that the paper is not independent of the school itself, and we require sources to be independent to show notability. The third and fourth links you posted are directory listings, and do not consist of significant coverage of the school, another thing which is required in order to prove notability. There is more information on what kind of sources we need to see at WP:CORP, or if you just want the basics there is a simple (and slightly in-your-face) guide at WP:42. Best — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 09:13, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 17:17, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 17:17, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 17:17, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks Mr. Stradivarius for the clarification. That case study has two authors. The main author has no relation with the Safir Academy. In fact 08:15, 1 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KTC (talk) 00:11, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Keep - sources have been identified that are sufficient to meet WP:ORG. TerriersFan (talk) 02:22, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi TerriersFan. I didn't think that the sources listed so far in this debate were enough to pass WP:ORG, per the independence and significant coverage concerns I noted in my comment above, so your assertion that the sources meet the guideline is a little surprising to me. Which sources in particular did you think were sufficient? Perhaps we are interpreting WP:ORG slightly differently? Best — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 02:49, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - Per In fact links. ● Mehran Debate● 12:36, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi there Mehran. Sorry if this sounds a bit rude, but did you actually look at In fact's links? These two links don't have significant coverage of the school, and these two links point to the same study, jointly written by one of the teachers at the school, and are therefore not independent of the article's subject. In my understanding, none of these links are able to count towards WP:ORG or WP:GNG. — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 15:58, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Mr. Stradivarius, I call this independent, whether it has been written by one of the teachers at the school, it's independent because it has been published by an independent and notable university. You're right that it seems not to be notable, but regards to WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES and also the significance of the school which has been mentioned here, overall I believe it could be notable. Sincerely ● Mehran  Debate● 18:13, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * You're right that Ferdowsi University of Mashhad is a respectable institution, of course. No-one is doubting that. If we look at WP:GNG, though, it says that '"Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by those affiliated with the subject or its creator.' Note that it says "produced by" and not "published by". Although the publisher may be independent of the subject, the producers of the work are not. In all likelihood, the only reason this study was conducted at Safir English Academy was that one of the co-authors teaches there. This doesn't seem like good evidence that the school has been taken note of by completely independent sources to me. Also, I see that you have mentioned WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES, but that usually applies to high schools and universities. As far as I can tell, Safir English Academy is a private language school that operates for profit, and we usually treat these kinds of schools as companies or organizations, with no automatic assumption of notability. — <span style="color: #194D00; font-family: Palatino, Times, serif">Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 14:15, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I didn't see the sentence "usually applies to high schools and universities" in WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. Adversely it has been written in the first line that "... schools and other education institutions ..." and also regards to Most independently accredited degree-awarding institutions and high schools are being kept except when zero independent sources can be found to prove that the institution actually exists.. And Safir is an independently accredited degree-awarding institution which has been mentioned in several independent sources. ● Mehran Debate● 15:35, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I didn't see any mention anywhere of them awarding degrees. If you mean Cambridge ESOL, that's not a degree, but a certificate of English proficiency. Maybe you are talking about another qualification they award that I didn't spot? — <span style="color: #194D00; font-family: Palatino, Times, serif">Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 16:26, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * But this is adequate for keeping the article in my opinion. ● Mehran Debate● 20:20, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:59, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

<hr style="width:55%;" /> <hr style="width:55%;" />
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 00:26, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

<hr style="width:55%;" />
 * Delete for lack of independent sources discussing the school. WP:ORG is our guideline here, the outcomes page is not a reason not to delete and indeed is likely to be affected by the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Notability (organizations and companies). What our guideline says is "A company, corporation, organization, school, team, religion, group, product, or service is notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in secondary sources. Such sources must be reliable, and independent of the subject. A single independent source is almost never sufficient for demonstrating the notability of an organization." This does not seem to be the case for this school and none of the !votes for Keep have made a case that it is. Dougweller (talk) 09:28, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - Sorry, as a deletion argument that is invalid. Experience shows that with enough local research high schools invariably can be made to meet WP:ORG. However, though we delete subjects that are not likely to be notable for lack of sources, we don't delete stubs of subjects that are likely to be notable; we tag for improvement - this is the way we develop the encyclopaedia. The constructive way forward is not deletion it is carrying out effective searches eg starting with the Persian Google. TerriersFan (talk) 21:32, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment What do your comments about high schools have to do with this article? It's not a high school. And your argument seems to be "surely we can find some sources to show notability some time in the future, so we won't delete this argument." No, if we can't find sources now, we delete it and allow it to be recreated if and when sources are found. Dougweller (talk) 21:39, 19 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete : A chain of commercial high street language cram schools - not a notable mainstream high school which is what are meant in Outcomes. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:36, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete doesn't seem to be a high school... <span style="font: Tahoma, Arial, San-Serif; font-size: 8pt;">&tilde;danjel [ talk &#124; contribs ] 16:24, 27 January 2013 (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.