Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sri Gurudeva PU College (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  10:53, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Sri Gurudeva PU College
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

I have done the required due diligence here. "PU College", in this context, would appear to mean Pre-University College - no current English language Wikipedia article - should there be? While "Pre-University College" may have a more global meaning, I note that the Government of Karnataka's National Informatics Centre branch does have "Dept. of Pre University Education" page here about the college. Before the |February 2017 RFC this may have retained, as an institution that awards tertiary education level degrees and diplomas. Other than that, and in 2020, with no mentions in independent third-party reliable sources, and with the only its own website and social media posts as purported references, I see no good reason to overturn the April 2020 deletion discussion. Pete AU aka Shirt58 (talk) 11:32, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  13:26, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  13:26, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  13:26, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. Degree-awarding institution, which we usually keep. Now has more than a Facebook page, which was the reason for deletion in the original AfD. The cited RfC, which was controversial in any case, did not refer to tertiary institutions at all, but only to secondary schools (the clue is in the title: RfC on secondary school notability!); it cannot be arbitrarily extended. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:54, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep It is not a school, where we need WP:SIGCOV etc to be met to establish notability. This is a degree awarding college. ─ The Aafī (talk) 10:02, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 03:12, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. Private educational institutes including schools and colleges need multiple independent RS to establish notability per WP:NCORP. -- KartikeyaS (talk) 08:41, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Not sure how you can cite WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES when #2 clearly says that colleges are usually kept. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:41, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , Exactly my point. ─ The Aafī (talk) 04:44, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
 * "Usually" doesn't mean "always." --Adamant1 (talk) 04:53, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Why are you guys wasting time on discussing something that has been long deprecated? It has also been recommended to avoid it in AfDs. . —usernamekiran (talk) 10:16, 8 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete This fails the notability guidelines. While WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES might be a thing, it says "most" (not all) independently accredited degree-awarding institutions have enough coverage to be notable, and I don't think this one doesn't. Going by the date of establishment, 2006, it's highly un-likely that all the in-depth coverage, if there was any, would only be available offline. Maybe if it was established 50 years ago or something, but even then there would likely be some usable sources that we could access. In this case, if they were out there they should be readily available though. --Adamant1 (talk) 05:49, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
 * delete WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES begins with: The current notability guidelines for schools and other education institutions are Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N) and Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) (WP:ORG). It also says WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES should be added to the Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions, as it is an accurate statement of the results but promotes circular reasoning. The subject here fails WP:NORG. Also per Adamant1. —usernamekiran (talk) 04:19, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I wasn't aware I cited WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES! I will cite WP:COMMONSENSE, but that's apparently (and very sadly) an outdated concept for many on Wikipedia. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:55, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I consider arguing for a non-notable subject to be kept is definitely not WP:COMMONSENSE —usernamekiran (talk) 13:31, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
 * It is most certainly common sense to keep an article on a degree-awarding tertiary institution and to consider all such to be notable. But as I said... -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:15, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Luckily for everyone here Wikipedia isn't a "common sense" based thing. Otherwise, it probably wouldn't exist in the first place. BTW, I'm just wondering but don't you think its a little ironic that your using the notability guidelines in your keep arguements, while your also saying on your talk page that said guidelines don't exist and your also calling anyone who uses them smug rule-obsessed trolls? Adamant1 (talk) 11:35, 11 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete: Article does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NSCHOOL / (WP:ORGCRIT). Subject lacks WP:IS WP:RS WP:SIGCOV that address the subject directly and in-depth. There is basic, run of the mill, routine, normal, coverage. Sources in article are not IS RS or are a directory listings. BEFORE revealed nothing.  // Timothy ::  talk  01:38, 11 November 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.