Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shikshan Prasarak Mandali

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Kraxler (talk) 20:50, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Shikshan Prasarak Mandali[edit]

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

I attempted improving this article but the details are so messy and sources seem to say this is Sir Parshurambhau College so I'm not sure if this needs to be redirected there or what. My searches were this, this, this, this. Some of the issues I'm talking about is this book which is not clear about the details (who is "Raja Saheb of Jamakhandi" and "Parashurambhau Patwardhan"?). A look at the edits shows significant improvement and a better understanding has never been made much less sources. Schools are considered notable but this seems to be more of a school authority. SwisterTwister talk 06:30, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 14:21, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 14:21, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. This seems to be similar in purpose to the Deccan Education Society, founded slightly later by people in the same social group but with a stronger emphasis on Marathi culture. Given the information in the article at the time of nomination, a redirect to Sir Parshurambhau College would certainly have been appropriate, but the sourced information added since then by User:Dharmadhyaksha is worth preserving if possible but would be of dubious relevance there. There is also unsourced information in earlier versions of the article that would be worth restoring if it could be reliably sourced. The organisation has existed for over a hundred years and establish several notable educational institutions, and my feeling is that an editor with access to and some knowledge of relevant sources could probably firmly establish the notability for a standalone article. On the question of whether this should survive as standalone, I am not currently sure either way. PWilkinson (talk) 08:05, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

PWilkinson (talk) 08:05, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for being of historic nature and having helped establish numerous notable educational institutes in MH. The information on the society is tough to find online. Very few hits are relevant; some even contradict on the year of establishment 1883/88. But there is enough coverage on recent happenings in the society which cover the mismanagement rather than management by the group. e.g.. Overall, reputable on its own to stay as a standalone article but with lack of enough information to make it "appear" suitable. Btw, I am reluctant to add primary sources for listing down the institutes which are run by them. Its a gray area whether primary sources should be used to establish just the names of the institutes covered. Many editors would be against it, although I am pro, and hence I haven't added other colleges in the list. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 08:35, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per reasons stated by Dharma. Also, this is a founding institute for some of the very famous colleges in Mumbai and Pune. - Vivvt (Talk) 09:01, 29 July 2015 (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.