Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Faculty of Medicine, University of Colombo

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 no consensus. An unfortunate outcome, but the only possible one, given keep !votes that are not based in policy, but otherwise a lack of engagement. No prejudice toward speedy renomination. Vanamonde (Talk) 01:51, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Faculty of Medicine, University of Colombo

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I prodded this with "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. ". It was deprodded by User:Atlantic306 with a comment "a valid split from the main article or suggest merge and redirect to University of Colombo". Sadly, this article has no reliably referenced content to merge, so if prod was disputed, time to discuss a simple deletion, unless anyone can find references to suggest this sub-university division is actually independently notable? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:44, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:44, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sri Lanka-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:44, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:02, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:02, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not going to vote yet but imo it doesn't have to have independent referencing to be remerged to the main article providing that article's notability is already established, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 19:13, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The current sourcing is pretty weak but if it is genuinely “the second oldest medical school in South Asia” and “the topmost medical faculty in the country” there must be more sources. Mccapra (talk) 22:22, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep So far I’ve found 1, 2 and 3 plus plenty of colonial period snippets. Mccapra (talk) 22:43, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can’t search in Tamil or Sinhalese.Mccapra (talk) 22:48, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mccapra: Thanks. The first paper and the second papers are identical. Further, this is hardly in-depth about the subject, the article mentions like facts about this school in that many sentences. That is very borderline if we try to stretch it to GNG/NORG requirements' for in-depth coverage. Seriously, I can quote all the relevant content here: "The history of undergraduate medical education in Sri Lanka dates back to 1870, when the Colombo Medical School was founded... [subsequently] the Faculty of Medicine became part of the University of Colombo... In the mid-1980s, the Colombo Medical Faculty felt the need to change its traditional curriculum." That's it. Please let me know if I missed anything, but as far as I can tell, those are all the mentions of this institution in that source. It is mentioned briefly and in passing in the wider context (the history of medical education in Sri Lanka). The third reference is simply a paper published by researchers from that school, and it doesn't discuss the institution, it just mentions it as part of their affiliation. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:42, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notable, but most of the article needs to be removed or rewritten. Natureium (talk) 20:03, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:51, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:58, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Natureium Rajuiu (talk) 00:59, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment to the closing admin. Most keep votes here are just saying WP:ITSNOTABLE without providing any rationale, and the sources found are very weak (one is a two-sentence mention in passing and the other is irrelevant). NOTAVOTE, etc... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:42, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist; !votes saying 'just notable' without more reasoning do not carry much weight.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 18:11, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Sorry, but the sourcing just isn't there to pass WP:GNG or any other guideline. Everything is trivial or not really about the subject of the article in any meaningful way, if at all. --Adamant1 (talk) 05:10, 12 November 2020 (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.