Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Information and communications technology academy

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. fiolloweung the rewite this is a credible stub Spartaz ^Humbug! 22:36, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Information and communications technology academy

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

Reads like an advertisement, notability of subject not established, lacks reliable sources. XXX antiuser 22:14, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: School may be notable, but this article is a train wreck. The author has not been responsive when informed of article issues — in fact (s)he tried to remove the maintenance tags. Favonian (talk) 22:20, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. -- Cybercobra (talk) 22:56, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. -- Cybercobra (talk) 22:57, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - as a degree-awarding institution. None of the arguments postulated by Favonian has validity. TerriersFan (talk) 23:51, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It was created just yesterday, and just because it was badly written doesn't mean that it should be deleted. See WP:RUBBISH. We should probably give the creator more time, and if (s)he doesn't respond, then bring this up again. Hardtofindaname 08:53, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If we do decide to keep it, I'll help Separino wikify it. Hardtofindaname 08:56, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to help resolve the sounding-like-an-ad issue, but it's going to take some time. Hardtofindaname 09:30, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Separino has said on Hardtofindaname's talk page that he created the page for his company because his boss asked him to. The only google result I see for the article subject is their own website. I've seen articles speedy deleted for less. This doesn't seem to pass WP:NOTE, or are there exceptions for being a degree-awarding institution? XXX antiuser 16:32, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After checking myself, I say Delete; I'll suggest to the user to work on the article in userspace, if that's acceptable. Sound reasonable? Hardtofindaname 03:14, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Moving it to user space for overhaul sounds like the best solution. Favonian (talk) 07:39, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy for overhaul, or if not possible, delete as lacking independent reliable sources. -- The Anome (talk) 13:53, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's a degree granting institution of higher education, not just a business school. The article needs thorough rewriting, but that's not reason for deletion. DGG ( talk ) 18:27, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I would say that's exactly the reason for deletion. That way, someone who isn't an employee of the company in question can write a better article that isn't unreadable and doesn't sound like an ad. XXX antiuser 19:35, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - deletion isn't necessary prior to a rewrite. Indeed, it hinders rather than helps a rewrite since content useful in a rewrite is lost. TerriersFan (talk) 13:34, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion: Perhaps a page move then? We can move it to userspace and then delete the redirect. Hardtofindaname 08:19, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's a good compromise. The article in its current form really doesn't belong in article space, and it's not making very much progress. Moving it to user space would give the author time to improve it. Favonian (talk) 08:28, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - If the outcome is any form of keep, it is in dire need of a complete rewrite (as I have so tagged)--Unionhawk ^Talk ^E-mail 18:40, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - OK; in response to the comments above I have cleaned up and stubbed the page. It now needs a search for local sources; it should be noted that Filipino institutions generally have a poor internet presence. TerriersFan (talk) 21:54, 19 August 2009 (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.