Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GL Bajaj Institute of Technology and Management

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. Daniel (talk) 03:45, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GL Bajaj Institute of Technology and Management (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not satisfy WP:schooloutcomes or WP:nschool or wp:org. Vikram Vincent 13:06, 9 March 2021 (UTC) * Propose a merge with the university page, since that is notable. Vikram Vincent 10:32, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Vikram Vincent 13:06, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Vikram Vincent 13:06, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:25, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:25, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Lacking WP:RS, failing WP:NSCHOOL. --Gpkp [u • t • c] 16:23, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Accredited degree-awarding tertiary institution, so most certainly satisfies WP:Schooloutcomes. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:08, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Degree awarded institute which is affiliated with a recognized university. DMySon 18:22, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The article clearly lacks reliable sources — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pranhita (talk • contribs) 04:49, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Sources in the article are not SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth, BEFORE showed nothing with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth, more database and directory style listings. The keep votes above do not list any sources to check, and the reasons listed are opinions not supported by guidelines. Fails GNG and ORGCRIT.  // Timothy :: talk  12:01, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source eval table

• Delete private colleges are treated no differently then any other private organization when it comes to the notability guidelines, and this college clearly fails them due to the lackluster state of the sources. So, deleting the article is the correct, policy based thing to do. --Adamant1 (talk) 09:00, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment unless someone can come with WP:THREE sources to satisfy WP:GNG or WP:NSCHOOLS the article needs to be deleted. The last few pages I nominated for AFD are being deleted so the "consensus" is moving to delete non-notable tertiary institutes. Vikram Vincent 07:01, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.