Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IOND University

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 I think it is safe to call this one. The consensus here thus far is to keep the article. There have been no arguments to delete, it appears unlikely there will be any such arguement. NonvocalScream (talk) 12:14, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IOND University

The subject of this article via OTRS has requested deletion. This should not be construed as an otrs action however, but a courtesy nomination for community discussion. Personally, on my own, I don't really see much notability here. NonvocalScream (talk) 03:37, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed existence of OTRS ticket: 2008021910001865, see also 2008021410003443. As NonvocalScream says, this fact is only as persuasive as editorial consensus determines it to be. Daniel (talk) 03:46, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any way for us to see the reasons for the request? I doubt most people have access to the OTRS. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 04:53, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is not really needed here, I just thought it would be ok to include what I did, but I would not be comfortable including much more. This is not an otrs action, and there were not really any reasons inside the ticket other than what I can say here. I do however encourage the subject to comment here, if he or she would like to remark. NonvocalScream (talk) 11:22, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I see no reason for deletion. Passes the Google test. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:49, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Forgive me, "google test"? NonvocalScream (talk) 03:51, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
WP:GOOGLE ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:57, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. References given, plenty of online sources, many referring to the upcoming court case, which together with the definition of the University as a diploma mill, is presumably the reason for the OTRS ticket. Not immensely notable in the great scheme of things, but certainly not NN. Black Kite 03:53, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. cab (talk) 04:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment 20k hits on their Japanese name イオンド大学 [1]; haven't sorted through them yet to look for reliable sources. The jawiki article was the subject of a very long AfD debate (see also the article talk page) and has since been restubbed and locked due to an edit war; but the version before the edit war was quite well-sourced [2]. I also note with amusement their Japanese Uncyclopedia page: [3] cab (talk) 04:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as there are plenty of reliable, third-party sources for any negative claims made in the article. I see no policy-based (or other) reason to remove it. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 04:51, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as well-sourced article. --DAJF (talk) 05:19, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Even in Japan, where there seem to be an awful lot of them, universities seem to have at least some notability. Thus something representing itself as a university in Japan for any extended period (I mean, not as a joke or similar) would seem either to be notable or to be a notable misrepresentation. This example seems to have got some attention and some citable sources. -- Hoary (talk) 05:23, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment See the following in the Japanese Wikipedia:

イオンド大学 Article on IOND
Wikipedia:削除依頼/イオンド大学 20070329 Articles for Deletion discussion on IOND
Wikipedia:削除依頼/イオンド大学 20070329/抗議通知 Letter of protest from IOND regarding AfD discussion
Wikipedia:削除依頼/イオンド大学 20070329/メール Messages from IOND regarding AfD discussion

Fg2 (talk) 08:16, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

could you summarize the discussion there for us? DGG (talk) 09:46, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For starters, the article. It presently has three sentences. The first describes it as a registered company; the second details the acronym and explains it in Japanese; the third states that it has schools in Japan and Hawaii.

Next, the Articles for Deletion discussion. The decision was Keep, and unless I miscounted that was based on 21 favoring keep, 2 favoring delete. Despite the outcome, the article at present bears little resemblance to the article on March 28, 2007 (the day before the AfD) as this difference shows.

If time permits, I'll summarize #3 and #4 tomorrow or soon afterwards. Fg2 (talk) 11:52, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The webpage Wikipedia and IOND University summarizes some past actions on the Japanese Wikipedia. The English-language website for IOND University is currently displaying a moving banner that presents a series of allegations regarding the owner of that webpage, for example that he is "notoriously discriminatory in educational backgrounds." --Orlady (talk) 16:47, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment IOND's legal threats are hollow, so the Wikipedia Community and the Foundation need not mind it. Because of my edits on jawiki, IOND sent me two threatening mails (one was e-mail, and another was snail mail), and published my name as one of criminals[4][5], but nothing further happened. --NobuoSakiyama (talk) 17:57, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Wow. Those two pages lead me to believe that "university" is run by a bunch of idiots who spend too much of their time trying to point fingers at other people rather than doing anything productive. Some of the accusations on the Japanese page are really rude. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 02:58, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Joe, how could you dare suggest idiocy in an institution that includes a ground (or wind?) breaking school such as this? -- Hoary (talk) 03:10, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      - But there's an article on the subject, so it must be valid. (^_^) ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 03:41, 20 February 2008 (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.