Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chitra Group of Institutions

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. Michig (talk) 06:51, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Chitra Group of Institutions[edit]

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

I'm not sure this is even real. It's completely unclear whether this is trying to describe a single campus containing a group of schools at various levels, or one particular school within a group. Undocumentable: the website is the only source, and well worth looking at [1], for it contains no usable information whatsoever. Check in particular the "Instructors" page [2]: it consists of photos of 4 different people all with the same name, and all described as "Lorem Ipsum is simply dummy text of the printing and typesetting" DGG ( talk ) 04:26, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Lakun.patra (talk) 04:45, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are unfair, it is the "instuctors" page, and it shows a polymorph "chamistry" teacher. Well, the website is obviously in construction with stock photos and such.

Now for the serious stuff: "huge" internet presence (linkedins and such) but no evidence at all of physical presence. Hence, straightforward delete unless sources are found (I would not say "better sources" in that case). Tigraan (talk) 10:54, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete; unable to find any sources establishing notability. APerson (talk!) 14:51, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A website full of lorem ipsum is probably an hoax. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:30, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:51, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:53, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails verifiability. Cavarrone 11:15, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - what do they think Wikipedia is, that they expect us to publish an article about an institution which cannot even sort out a website or spell "instructor"? At least it has given me a smile, and I now know where to apply when I want a degree in Lorem ipsum. But, to be clear, even if the website were all glossy and finished and plausible-looking, we should not consider an article until there are references showing significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources, and I don't see any. JohnCD (talk) 20:39, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: as I expected, a Tineye search finds that the pictures of the happy smiling students and the "instuctors" are stock images such as this and this. JohnCD (talk) 08:51, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- This clearly fails the sourcing and significant coverage requirements for WP:ORG. And an alleged 30-year-old academic institution (or "one of India's leading group of institutions.") with an unfinished website and a Wikipedia editor with the same name as the school founder creates a lot of doubt. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 16:45, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I received on my talk page:

sir/madam the work in website is going on and it will be finished as soon as possible, then all the images of various schools will be uploaded. I request you sir to kindly wait for some time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sagarsachan12 (talk • contribs) 18:00, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

@Sagarsachan12: I brought it here because that is were the discussion about the article deletion should be. I am not impressed, since even if the website was perfect and had a higher Alexa rank than Wikipedia itself, there still would not be any evidence out there that the Chitra group of Institutions is notable or even exists. (The website could pass, but that's another subject.) Tigraan (talk) 21:32, 29 March 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.