Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St Christopher Iba Mar Diop College of Medicine 2

St Christopher Iba Mar Diop College of Medicine

AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/St Christopher Iba Mar Diop College of Medicine
• Articles for deletion/St Christopher Iba Mar Diop College of Medicine 2

St Christopher Iba Mar Diop College of Medicine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

NN. Only one secondary source available. ongoing editwarring ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 22:41, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

• Delete and salt. All sources but one are primary sources. Ongoing and relentless disruption. See also Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/St Christopher ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 22:43, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

• Delete and salt. Agree with Jossi Uponleft (talk) 22:49, 29 June 2008 (UTC) — Uponleft (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

• Weak delete: I don't quite agree about the primariness of the sources, but bottom line is that this institution is marginally notable at best for being mentioned in passing as unaccredited by various US states and the UK. This is all I could find on Google News, which doesn't seem enough to build a good article. The constant campaigns to whitewash the article by rotating groups of SPA's are a pain to deal with as well. I'm reluctant to "reward" such tactics, but the bottom line is that we are better off without this article. It's a nexus of disruption and will never be a decent article without better sources, which don't exist. MastCell ^Talk 22:58, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

• Strong Keep Many RS and 3rd party sources have covered this school. It passes the notability test quite well. Further, WP:SCHOOL demonstrates that this university does indeed pass the notability test. Bstone (talk) 23:29, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I only see one secondary source, all others being primary sources, or used in a away that is borderline in its compliance with WP:NOR. Basically, a marginally notable institution, constant disruption, and not enough material for an article. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:09, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - Agreed with Jossi 69.244.177.252 (talk) 01:14, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

This article in the BBC does a good job of establishing notability. Plus, the previous AfD and ArbCom case also lend credence to it's notability. Bstone (talk) 01:16, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

One article is not enough for a quality and NPOV WP article, and an ArbCom case is not basis to assert notability, on the contrary: it only demonstrates what a bloody waste of community time this marginal organization has already taken. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:21, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

No Vote -- IMHO, deletion of this page would serve only one purpose :: to enable apologists to "prove" that the doubts, criticism etc. had been removed from Wikipedia, ad to argue to that had been done because ST.C was a 100% genuine institution. In addition, the soi-disant edit wars indicate notability to me. -- Simon Cursitor (talk) 10:00, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

• Keep Colleges of medicine are notable. That this is technically a branch campus does not make it less notable--the international "branches" of notable universities are as notable as any other major part of a university. Anfd for that matter, many medical schools are and have always been located at branch campuses other than the main university. By continuing practice, unaccredited does not mean non-notable--the information is important and there are always discussions of the accreditation for references and links, such as the bbc. One article from such a source is quite enough for an article. And the difficulty of maintaining an article has never been accepted as reason for deletion. DGG (talk) 12:44, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Please add it to your watchlist then... :) ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 15:22, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

• Keep This school, while not exactly high profile, is notable as a college of medicine (albeit with controversial credentials). I imagine people in the community interested in more information about this institution may find this entry useful. Andrew73 (talk) 15:39, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
• Strong Delete,and Salt. I would have to agree with Jossi and Mast Cell's comments. This school is not notable. Remember the criteria for notability involves "significant" "substantial" coverage by secondary sourceS. The accreditation status doesn't influence this decision either, accredited or non accredited, same argument applies, and the information being "important" or community interest does not lend to notability. Remember, notability "is not synonymous with "fame" or "importance."

As far as deleting the article sending a message of authenticity, that is a personal opinion that some may have. On the contrary, some may also be of the opinion that it was removed because it was a non-notable organization (which the latter happens to be the case, by definition, as discussed above). Who's to guess what people may infer by an article deletion, or if they would even notice at all? The endless disruption, article going to ArbCom, and edit warring only serve as further weight for trying to make something out of nothing (trying to make something notable which it clearly is not) and wasting everyones' time. Traden (talk) 15:43, 1 July 2008 (UTC)