Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Institute for Stem Cell Science and Regenerative Medicine

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 delete. No prejudice against restoration to draft should additional sources be found supporting notability. BD2412 T 03:55, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Institute for Stem Cell Science and Regenerative Medicine

[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)

No sources are used within the article to verify the existence of the Institute for Stem Cell Science and Regenerative Medicine. Two of the references cited are from the Institute's own website, thus the lack of independent sources makes this a non-notable article. And from my research I have not been able to find any sources that can verify the existence of such an organization outside of the Institute's own website. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:06, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:23, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:23, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:05, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Biology-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:05, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:05, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Info - Note to closer for soft deletion: While this discussion appears to have no quorum, it is NOT eligible for soft deletion because it has been previously PROD'd (via summary).

--Cewbot (talk) 00:02, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:51, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 03:31, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, lacks WP:SIGCOV. Waddles 🗩 🖉 04:52, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:42, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This appears to fail WP:NCORP with respect to WP:CORPDEPTH, and I don't see WP:SIGCOV based off of my searching. Since this is in Bangalore, it is possible that such material exists in another language that I can't read or write in, but I favor deletion based upon what evidence I can gather. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 05:35, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Quick search on google shows that this institute plays important role in dealing with COVID in the region. -GorgonaJS (talk) 15:22, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And unless you can, from this "quick search on google", show sources which indicate that this meets WP:GNG; then you have simply presented an assertion without evidence, and the article should still be deleted despite the muddying of waters created by your comment. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 14:32, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: lacks WP:SIGCOV DEFCON5 (talk) 15:11, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. There does appear to be some coverage in google books; particularly in relation to the Bangalore Life Science Cluster (BLSC) of which the Institute for Stem Cell Science and Regenerative Medicine (ISCSRM) is one of five member organizations. I think the BLSC does have enough coverage to pass GNG. If an editor is wanting to take on that project, I would suggest draftifying this article with the intent of developing an article on the BLSC. Otherwise, the only option is to delete as I didn't find enought coverage on ISCSRM to pass SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 16:55, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As per nomination. MrsSnoozyTurtle 04:01, 16 October 2021 (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.