Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tsinghua-MIT Global MBA


 * 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.  Hut 8.5  22:25, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Tsinghua-MIT Global MBA

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG. Not to be confused with Tsinghua University or Tsinghua University School of Economics and Management, which are mentioned in the sources. Kleuske (talk) 16:13, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as artspam. Full of peacock terms and PoV. The article was developed by a team of meatppuppets with a COI. While schools and universities are considered notable, educational programmes are not. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:03, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep and require further improvement. Explanation is put in the talk page so as not to clutter up discussion here. Mzhang88 (talk) 15:41, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
 * ,lPLease see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:32, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Notability and notability and alignment to Wiki guidelines
 * This article was initially written by unexperienced students and thus had some peacock terms and POV. This was partially also a consequence of the language barrier in English. However, these parts have been removed, and we will further amend the article and add sources in order to meet the WP:NPOV policy. In reply to "meatpuppets with a COI", we have disclosed COI on the article’s talk page as per WP:DISCLOSE. Everything we mention is originally not written by ourselves but cited from verifiable sources.


 * Article in poor writing doesn't constitute as a solid reason for deletion according to the page WP:AfD. If the article contains wrong or non-notable information, please help us identify the passage or language of concern but do not suggest to delete the page.


 * Whether or not a subject is notable does not depend exclusively on its form, but largely upon public awareness and significant effects of it. Being an educational program doesn't necessarily mean inherent non-notability. According to the notability guidelines WP:ORG and WP:NOTABILITY, the primary criteria to determine whether the article is notable are “the organization has received significant coverage in multiple sources". Contents are cited from reputable external sources including, Bloomberg, Financial Times, etc although the majority of additional sources do exist in non-English publications such as People Daily, Sohu and NetEase due to its public awareness in China. In additional, the policies have alternative criterion about whether "the scope of activities is national or international in scale". For the Tsinghua-MIT Global MBA, the program is an important academic collaboration between China and the United States represented through two well established universities - not simply a program entirely devised by a single Eastern or Western institution.
 * Friesehamburg (talk) 10:34, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
 * . This may be true outside Wikipedia, but as for our encyclopedia, the Wikipedia community decides what is sufficiently notable for inclusion. Being an educational program does not accord inherent notability either; take for example International Baccalaureate which is an old established programme with a Wikipedia article supported by no less than  70 solid referenced sources. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:47, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:08, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:41, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 13:58, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 13:58, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete Educational degree programmes are usually not considered notable, unless there are multiple reliable third party sources talking about. I don't see that here. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 09:46, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, st170e talk 12:31, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Individual university courses are not normally notable, and the promotional undercurrent of the article makes me profoundly uncomfortable. Can be mentioned in the articles about the participating universities.  Sandstein   12:51, 20 December 2016 (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.