Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One year MBA in India

One year MBA in India

One year MBA in India (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

My original PROD explanation was "A mere observation, doesn't indicate anything of note about one year MBAs in India. Also, is this intended to advertise the programs at the listed schools?" Now the user indicates that he basically intends for this article to be a guide or directory for people interested in looking for one-year MBA programs. I think Wikipedia is not a directory applies. Comments? —Largo Plazo (talk) 09:47, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

• Delete WP:NOTDIR was surely meant for this. Mangoe (talk) 10:18, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete as an ad and excessive links in the title. - ÆÅM «(fætsøn!) 10:21, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
• Keep I created this article as it becomes a useful resource in understanding what is a one year MBA like in India and what are the current programs on offer. I have noted your concerns (excessive link, ad, etc) and will try to address them. Also, I would like somebody from India (no offence please) to comment on this. WikiOn ( t | c ) 10:28, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
  • None of the issues raised so far involve Wikipedia's policies on notability or point of view, so I doubt it will matter whether anyone from India participates in this discussion. One of the chief (and culture-neutral) issues raised is that the article you are trying to create, as you described it to me, is a directory, and I referenced Wikipedia's guidelines on that for you in the article's talk page. You haven't addressed that particular issue.—Largo Plazo (talk) 10:35, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
    • Don't misunderstand, it has nothing to do with culture. It is just about the need of such an article for a person residing in India. The institutes listed are the top institutes in India who do not require any advertisement like what the purpose is thought of for this article. The main purpose, I repeat, for this article is to explain the nature of One-year MBA in India. WikiOn ( t | c ) 10:41, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
      • See WP:NOT. You can include a generic overview of MBA in India in Education in India. The term "One year MBA in India" seems to be coined without a reliable attribution of notability. =Nichalp «Talk»= 14:30, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
        • Please refer this link to understand the term One Year MBA in India. I hope EssayLever is considered a reliable source WikiOn ( t | c ) 16:06, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
• Delete, plainly a directory; especially because the nom seems to think that Indians have more use for it than others, so it's even more obvious that it's not here simply to be a standard encyclopedia article. Nyttend (talk) 12:26, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Look the institutes offer admissions based on GMAT scores. So any person from anywhere in the world my be interested in a 1-year MBA program in India.
• Delete per WP:NOTDIR. McWomble (talk) 13:39, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. —Salih (talk) 13:53, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
• Delete -- per my statement above. =Nichalp «Talk»= 14:30, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. Most reasons are covered above; WP:NOTDIR, WP:NOTGUIDE etc. Plus, individual institute articles list and detail different programs offered. A need for separate list does not make sense. Also ^LeaveSleaves _talk15:28, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
• Clarification needed I see that people are unanimous in opinion about deletion of this article. However, people please let me know how come an article like List_of_institutes_and_colleges_in_British_Columbia is appropriate and not a directory. @Nichalp - what kind of attribution would suffice for one year MBA. Common people, help me out. This information has to be presented. Tell me what is the appropriate way to do so! Would changing the article name to List of Institutes offering one year MBA in India suffice WikiOn ( t | c ) 15:48, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment A word of advice: please stop insisting that the article "has to be presented". If indeed it doesn't meet the criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia, then it doesn't "need" to be on Wikipedia, any more than it "needs" to be painted on the side of India's Parliament (and you'd be hard pressed to argue your case on grounds of necessity to the arresting police officer or to the judge).
  • As for changing the name of the article, you are making it more than a list, you are providing additional information—it isn't just a list. As lists goes, you've no doubt seen what WP:NOTDIR says about cross-purposing lists. You aren't creating a list of universities in India. You are talking about a much more constricted lists, of universities in India with one-year MBA programs. Imagine cross-multiplying that across all the different programs that universities might offer. That's where Wikipedia would cross the line into serving the purpose of a relational database. Also, consider this: the list is likely to be outdated in a year. Who will guarantee that it will be maintained indefinitely? Finally: would someone who needs information on one-year MBA programs in India not simply Google "one-year mba" india?—Largo Plazo (talk) 16:04, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
• Further details In India, there is a clear distinction between 2 year traditional MBA and 1 year MBA (which is available only recently). The course structure and mode of study are quite different. For example: Generally 2 year MBA intakes fresher or experienced graduates upto 2 years, whereas 1 year MBA requires experience from 2 to 5 years depending upon the program. 1 year MBA is fast-track and generally a specialization. 1 year MBA generally is for moving up the ladder in the same domain whereas 2 year MBA allows the flexibility to switch domains. But, 1 year MBA is somewhere in between Executive MBA and two year MBA. WikiOn ( t | c ) 15:57, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
  • I'm going to point out one more time, in an attempt to do nothing more than spare you the effort, that you are devoting a lot of energy to making arguments that don't address the issues that have been raised against the article.—Largo Plazo (talk) 16:06, 4 November 2008 (UTC)