- 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 redirect to List of universities in Nigeria. Admittedly, I don't see a majority point of view in this discussion. A Redirect closure is a bit of a compromise that will preserve article content in case there is a day, in the future, when notability can be established. I predict a move to Draft space would mean that this article would be deleted on January 14, 2024 as the article is out of sight and out of mind. Liz Read! Talk! 05:23, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Philomath University (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Subject does not meet the general notability guidelines for organisations. Best, Reading Beans (talk) 06:54, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Education, and Nigeria. Reading Beans (talk) 06:54, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to List of universities in Nigeria. The sources have problems with independence (interviews) or WP:SIGCOV, and do not appear to pass WP:GNG. –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:51, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Per nominator, doesn't pass WP:GNG.DarkHorseMayhem (talk) 13:00, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:20, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. State-accredited universities are generally kept. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:21, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @Necrothesp, I wish. But, where’s the link to the policy. Remember, every SNG is beneath GNG. Best, Reading Beans (talk) 03:59, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:CONSENSUS (a policy) established over many AfDs. If you wish, then why nominate it for deletion? That makes no sense whatsoever. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:07, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @Necrothesp, I would not want to continue lingering this thread as you firmly believe that EVERY learning institution is notable. That’s fine. There have been a lot of Nigerian accredited public schools that has been deleted over the years and I wished they were not deleted hence my “wish” for a policy that makes EVERY learning institution notable. And since this policy does not exist—yet, I will stick with the general notability guidelines. Philomath University is a new university and to me, it looks like an WP:UPE that is WP:TOOSOON. Best, Reading Beans (talk) 11:58, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- No, I don't. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:09, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:16, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - article may be a bit early but seems to have enough notability and referencing support for encyclopedic inclusion. - Indefensible (talk) 17:14, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]- Keep per Indefensible. Meegvun (talk) 17:44, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. I was a Professor at a Nigerian University (Bayero University) in its early days so I know something about them. This university is of course less notable than the larger state universities, but I think it is notable enough to be comparable to many other universities there that have articles and indeed better than some of them. --Bduke (talk) 05:57, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - It's a new University established in 2021, so there isn't much to write about it yet other than it exists, hence the lack of sources. If you're new to AFD, please read WP:SIRS - especially the part with the table where it reviews four different sources to determine if they provide notability - each source needs to meet ALL four requirements. I'm concerned people are coming here thinking this is a "vote" since they aren't explaining how it meets the notability criteria I just linked. Denaar (talk) 00:18, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:22, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete or move to draft. Since it's new, it's possible it will meet guidelines later even if it doesn't yet. Chamaemelum (talk) 08:46, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect - to List of universities in Nigeria. It is an accredited university, so listing there and a redirect are reasonable, but it doesn't meet WP:NCORP. Per Chamaemelum, this may just be WP:TOOSOON, but a redirect (without delete) will preserve the page history which can be used as and when there is significant coverage that meets WP:SIRS. But again, to be clear, this is not the case at this time. Also to add, Indefensible's keep states in the rationale that it may be too soon, and Meegyun says per Indefensible. This accords with my view, but then the policy should dictate delete. Redirect allows the information to be preserved until it is no longer too soon. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 10:21, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect as above. This is a private for-profit company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP criteria requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. As an aside (and not that it matters from a guidelines point of view) I'm not sure you can describe this university as "state-accredited" but closer to "licensed to operate". None of the references mentioned meet the criteria and I'm unable to locate any that does. HighKing++ 14:56, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as non-notable. As for the redirect to save the history of edits, I don't think there is anything that much valuable on the page yet. And draftify, too, is not known to create good new sources on its own. Deckkohl (talk) 17:30, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Unlike some of the other schools that clearly do not meet the requirements, I think enough references do exist to support this subject. But saving a draft would be preferable to deleting or redirecting in my opinion. - Indefensible (talk) 20:19, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
-
- If you read my !vote above, carefully, I point to WP:SIRS, WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:ORGIND. Leaving aside the whataboutery in your comment, you've listed two sources. This from The Guardian and this from NationalAccord. Is it not blindingly obvious that both of those articles are based entirely on PR from the company? How else could you explain two different journalists writing in two different publications producing exactly the same first paragraph with other paragraphs also exactly the same and a headline which has a single word difference? Or this in the Global Times? I urge you to become more familiar with our GNG/NCORP guidelines to avoid making these gaffs in future. HighKing++ 15:51, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Struck keep vote per above. I still think keeping the draft might be productive though. - Indefensible (talk) 18:05, 12 July 2023 (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.