Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Capitol Medical Center Colleges

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 - the suggestion to take this to Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines for verification is a good one. As this is a "no consensus" close, then if the Wikiproject cannot find verification then a further AFD would be appropriate. Neıl ☄ 10:42, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Capitol Medical Center Colleges[edit]

Procedural nom - removed PROD. Unsourced article, didn't assert notability, but may well be notable. I have no opinion. Black Kite 00:02, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

speedy delete, article is a spammy non-notable. β^_command 00:05, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- From talk:Capitol Medical Center Colleges: "This article is about a school and so ineligible for speedy deletion. 68.43.197.22 (talk) 02:09, 24 August 2008 (UTC)" (I thought you already knew this) ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 00:10, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In addition it is not spam.--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 00:13, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Nothing really bad with the article. It just needs some citations. --mboverload @ 00:13, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Ran google search, the institution checks out. It's a legitimate college that offers a ~~bachelors~~ program in nursing and it has already produced a significant number of graduates. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 00:15, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - notable and legitimate. « Diligent Terrier [talk] 00:21, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Is it possible to independently verify that the school is accredited to grant B.Sc. in Nursing degrees, as its website says? I did find a story regarding the school at the Phillipine military government website:[1] Nsk92 (talk) 00:24, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually that was a mistake on my part, I'm not sure of the specific accreditation this school awards graduates. I found numerous credible and independent mentions of the school, though most of them are not useful as sources (example). ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 00:29, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I say we put in {{underconstruction}} and see how it fares. --LordSunday (₪Scribe₪) (♦) 01:36, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:SCHOOL Bstone (talk) 07:39, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment "Keep per X", while a perfectly legitimate view, is often seen as 'bad form' at AFD - so I can only assume that when "X" isn't even policy it's very bad form. ~ AmeIiorate _{U T C} @ 10:36, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per complete lack of sources since the article's creation 3 years ago. I looked for sources but couldn't find any. I get this feeling they are probably out there somewhere, perhaps not in English. Keeping the article is essentially following LordSunday's suggestion... but the article has been around for such a long time without improvement already that I don't think it's worth trying. Mango juice^talk 12:22, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Another local phenomenon, local service center, with a local shadow. Without attestations to its service, profile, or importance, we're left with a hospital. I'm sure it's fine, but the name is overly populated, unsearchable, and says about as much as the article attached to it. Utgard Loki (talk) 15:40, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The one source that should have been helpful, the college's own website, returns "Not found" errors on every page except for the link to the CMC Hospital; when trying to link to information about the nursing school from the hospital's website, it returns to the college's one with the "Not found" errors. While it is possible this nursing school exists, none of the organisations with which it is purportedly associated have articles, raising the question of notability. No objection to re-creation if properly sourced to reliable references and if notability is clearly established. Risker (talk) 16:00, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the URL you are going too. there is an HTML error that causes the Error you encountered. Manual correction of the error will get you to the correct locations. Exit2DOS2000^•T•C• 22:50, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - although still a stub, it is verifiable. Passes WP:School as far as I can tell. Exit2DOS2000^•T•C• 22:50, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And passing a failed notability policy helps it how exactly? ~ AmeIiorate _{U T C} @ 22:52, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Passing a failed guidline is better than nothing. I would be safe in saying that there is at least a few that tend to agree with the general ideas behind it. Besides, it gives others a baseline to understand my !vote. Exit2DOS2000^•T•C• 03:01, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Let Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines know about the AFD and Relist. They can probably dig up verification if there is any. - Richfife (talk) 00:16, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The AFD has to run and then taken to WP:DRV for a relisting to take place. ~ AmeIiorate _{U T C} @ 01:37, 3 September 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.