Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zhejiang University City College

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. ansh 666 04:54, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Zhejiang University City College[edit]

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

not meet with WP:NGEO Tazkeung (talk) 16:25, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 17:49, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 17:49, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 17:49, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment as Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Common_outcomes#Schools states: "Most independently accredited degree-awarding institutions and high schools have historically been kept except when zero independent sources can be found to prove that the institution actually exists." - As long as this place issues degrees it should be notable and kept. WhisperToMe (talk) 23:33, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - http://english.zucc.edu.cn/art/2012/5/30/art_1342_51861.html says "Being an independent college of Zhejiang University, it offers a breadth of full-time undergraduate programs." and "ZUCC now has 35 undergraduate degree programs in 9 subordinate schools" and "Full-time candidates for master’s degrees and international students have also been recruited since 2003." - Sounds like it's degree-granting to me WhisperToMe (talk) 23:36, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - an independent tertiary educational institution is certainly notable. -Zanhe (talk) 16:35, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In 11 years here, I do not think we have deleted a single one, except in the cases where it could not be shown the institution was distinct from a parent institution, or had not actually started. That doesn't seem to be the case here. There are always sources, if one is able to look carefully enough. (and this is the reverse side of our practice in not making separate articles for primary and intermediate schools unless there is something special). — Preceding unsigned comment added by DGG (talk • contribs) 00:12, 22 April 2018 (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.