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. (aeropagitica) 12:53, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

International Council for Accrediting Alternate and Theological Studies[edit]

An "accrediting" group from India that lacks WP:RS and WP:V information on what it is, has 116 yahoo hits (including wikipedia mirrors), and was created by Lord Eddington (talk · contribs) in Feb. did not make any other edits. There has been plenlty of chance for this to be verfied, but it only gets white washed. According to the article on Education in India, this group is not a recognized accreditor.) Arbusto 20:45, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The less attention given to an accreditation mill, the better. Actually, a redirect to Accreditation mill might be better, but gets into POV territory. - Richfife 20:56, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: The schools tied to this:
  • Scofield Graduate School (Modesto, California) (Johnson C. Philip is the chancellor who is based in Kerala, India)
  • Calvin School of Apologetics and Theology (Kerala, India) (Johnson C. Philip is the president who is based in Kerala, India)
  • Trinity School of Apologetics & Theology (Kerala, India) (Johnson C. Philip is the president who is based in Kerala, India)
• Interesting connections. Arbusto 21:04, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete seems to be a just-about-verifiable but insignificant accreditation mill. Guy 13:59, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete there is no news sources, no goverment sources, created by a fly-by the night user, nothing verifiable, and nothing to demonstrate why it is notable. We don't need a flood of unverifable fake-academic places ran for profit. Can anyone demonstrate this is 1) real and 2) it has accredited schools not tied to the founder? CaliEd 16:26, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Nickieee 20:53, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletions. -- Hornplease 05:17, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or redirect per Richfife, if that seems ok. ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 06:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete for lack of reliable sources. --MCB 06:44, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - as it stands, this article appears to be only concerned to assert the non-notability of its subject. How odd. BTLizard 08:44, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 This AFD started on the 3 September page. It was relisted on the 7 September page by the original nominator with no rationale in the edit summary. Please add new discussions below this notice. GRBerry 01:28, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I put that I relisted these for more opinions here[1]. Arbusto 02:34, 8 September 2006 (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.