Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Won Institute of Graduate Studies (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 keep. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:39, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Won Institute of Graduate Studies
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable private educational institute. Pepper Beast   (talk)  13:29, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2019 October 19.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 13:47, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:31, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:31, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:32, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep: There is an in-depth coverage report by Epoch Times here and mentions in several news sources on Google News. Probably, notability should also be checked on Chinese-language search engines. Furthermore, there is research about the organization here, here and here, here. Seems notable enough to me, though the writing could be a little less peacocky.-- Farang Rak Tham   (Talk) 14:39, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment does a single article in the Epoch Times and a couple of mentions in research papers amount to "[being] the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject?" Seems like a tiny bit of a stretch to me.  Pepper Beast    (talk)  20:39, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment It's more than a mention. The school itself- it's policies and approach to education- is actually the primary subject of two of the linked articles. --Spasemunki (talk) 23:43, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment I don´t think Epoch Times is an independent mainstream newspaper. JimRenge (talk) 21:30, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions.  Farang Rak Tham   (Talk) 14:44, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Buddhism-related deletion discussions.  Farang Rak Tham   (Talk) 14:44, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions.  Farang Rak Tham   (Talk) 14:44, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
 * a couple of mentions in research papers, have you looked at the studies yet? They cover much more detail than just mentioning the subject.-- Farang Rak Tham   (Talk) 08:24, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I tried your links, and got one error, two paywalls, and a page snippet in Google Books, so I wasn't really able to assess.  Pepper Beast    (talk)  12:05, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
 * It's not a page snippet, they are accessible pages on Google Books. And I don't see why you got an error, I can load the file without any problems. As for the paywalls, you can request the sources through WP:RX. Or if you want me to send them to your Wikimail, that's also possible.-- Farang Rak Tham   (Talk) 12:57, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 17:27, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep: I'm able to verify all but one of the source posted, confirming independent coverage of the school in multiple sources. It's also an accredited school of higher education in the US, which means that the accrediting body counts as another source in terms of verification of basic facts. It does need some of the semi-promotional language removed, but that's a separate issue. Won is modern Korean tradition, so there would likely be additional coverage in Korean language sources or maybe the Korean wiki would be helpful- don't know how active that project is. --Spasemunki (talk) 23:37, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep per Spasemunki.4meter4 (talk) 06:06, 3 November 2019 (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.