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.
those are just the results of a search in scholar for "IHCA", and consist mostly of bibliography entries or passing mentions. Do you by chance have any in-depth coverage?
ThatMontrealIP (
talk)
18:03, 9 September 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete promotional concoction of user Jzsj. The main issue here is that existing sources are just passing mentions or very minimal, so it it is not possible to extract any information on the institute that is longer than a few words without doing
WP:OR as Jzsj did. I removed no less than three 'sources' that were actually just bibliography entries used to concoct some good old original research. The extant sources in search do not support notability.
ThatMontrealIP (
talk)
18:01, 9 September 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete The sources in the article fail to demonstrate notability as described above by ThatMontrealIP, so it fails
WP:NORG and
WP:GNG. The article also has issues with being a
WP:SYNTH of original research by the articles creator and is highly promotional of this organization.
Newshunter12 (
talk)
05:30, 22 September 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.
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.
those are just the results of a search in scholar for "IHCA", and consist mostly of bibliography entries or passing mentions. Do you by chance have any in-depth coverage?
ThatMontrealIP (
talk)
18:03, 9 September 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete promotional concoction of user Jzsj. The main issue here is that existing sources are just passing mentions or very minimal, so it it is not possible to extract any information on the institute that is longer than a few words without doing
WP:OR as Jzsj did. I removed no less than three 'sources' that were actually just bibliography entries used to concoct some good old original research. The extant sources in search do not support notability.
ThatMontrealIP (
talk)
18:01, 9 September 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete The sources in the article fail to demonstrate notability as described above by ThatMontrealIP, so it fails
WP:NORG and
WP:GNG. The article also has issues with being a
WP:SYNTH of original research by the articles creator and is highly promotional of this organization.
Newshunter12 (
talk)
05:30, 22 September 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.