- 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. – Joe ( talk) 11:45, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Koenig Institute
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Koenig Institute ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH miserably. Most of the RS hinges on Edward Snowden coming to India to do something here. That's not in-depth of the subject but of them. Also read the language. Campus is 18,000 sqft. Nomadicghumakkad ( talk) 11:28, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Nomadicghumakkad ( talk) 11:28, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Nomadicghumakkad ( talk) 11:28, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Education. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:43, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Contested soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:39, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep: Providing few significant sources of substantial coverage which satisfies WP:CORPDEPTH;
- A news article discussing a prolonged controversy
- A scholarly article, a book passage, or ongoing media coverage focusing on a product or organization
- 3- Hero or Traitor Edward Snowden and the NSA Spying Program Main case study page, Author: Laura Winig, Case Number: 2018.0
- Publication Date: April 30, 2014, Faculty Lead: Christopher Robichaud, Harvard Kennedy School, Hosted: University of Central Florida
- A documentary film exploring the impact of the corporation's facilities or products,
- 4-Significantly covered in Al Jazeera video news Al Jazeera report. RPSkokie ( talk) 01:51, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Please describe 'how' the given sources meet WP:CORPDEPTH. Simply listing sources and claiming that they meet CORPDEPTH doesn't have a lot of value. Will be helpful if you can specifically highlight which part of the sources meet CORPDEPTH. TOI is not even counted as a full WP:RS so that's out. Foreignpolicy.com source doesn't have in depth discussion or analysis of Koenig institute. Just a bunch of quotes from spokespersons. Please recall that for CORPDEPTH we need independent analysis, discussion and commentary. Al Jazeera is a generic report that they seem to have filed after this case. No traces of independent discussion of Koenig. In your Harvard source, Koening is mentioned only twice. That's passing mention at best, far away from significant coverage, let alone CORPDEPTH. Nomadicghumakkad ( talk) 22:03, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I just noted that the description of example of substantial coverage is broken or missing important parts. Right descriptions are A news article discussing a prolonged controversy
regarding a corporate merger
. And similarly, A documentary film exploringenvironmental
impact of the corporation's facilities or products Nomadicghumakkad ( talk) 01:16, 22 April 2022 (UTC) - Delete It would take a lot of substantial, in depth coverage to make a run-of-a-mill IT training facility notable and this institute doesn't have it. Liz Read! Talk! 01:11, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Modussiccandi ( talk) 08:37, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
- 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.
The result was delete. – Joe ( talk) 11:45, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Koenig Institute
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Koenig Institute ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH miserably. Most of the RS hinges on Edward Snowden coming to India to do something here. That's not in-depth of the subject but of them. Also read the language. Campus is 18,000 sqft. Nomadicghumakkad ( talk) 11:28, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Nomadicghumakkad ( talk) 11:28, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Nomadicghumakkad ( talk) 11:28, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Education. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:43, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Contested soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:39, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep: Providing few significant sources of substantial coverage which satisfies WP:CORPDEPTH;
- A news article discussing a prolonged controversy
- A scholarly article, a book passage, or ongoing media coverage focusing on a product or organization
- 3- Hero or Traitor Edward Snowden and the NSA Spying Program Main case study page, Author: Laura Winig, Case Number: 2018.0
- Publication Date: April 30, 2014, Faculty Lead: Christopher Robichaud, Harvard Kennedy School, Hosted: University of Central Florida
- A documentary film exploring the impact of the corporation's facilities or products,
- 4-Significantly covered in Al Jazeera video news Al Jazeera report. RPSkokie ( talk) 01:51, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Please describe 'how' the given sources meet WP:CORPDEPTH. Simply listing sources and claiming that they meet CORPDEPTH doesn't have a lot of value. Will be helpful if you can specifically highlight which part of the sources meet CORPDEPTH. TOI is not even counted as a full WP:RS so that's out. Foreignpolicy.com source doesn't have in depth discussion or analysis of Koenig institute. Just a bunch of quotes from spokespersons. Please recall that for CORPDEPTH we need independent analysis, discussion and commentary. Al Jazeera is a generic report that they seem to have filed after this case. No traces of independent discussion of Koenig. In your Harvard source, Koening is mentioned only twice. That's passing mention at best, far away from significant coverage, let alone CORPDEPTH. Nomadicghumakkad ( talk) 22:03, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I just noted that the description of example of substantial coverage is broken or missing important parts. Right descriptions are A news article discussing a prolonged controversy
regarding a corporate merger
. And similarly, A documentary film exploringenvironmental
impact of the corporation's facilities or products Nomadicghumakkad ( talk) 01:16, 22 April 2022 (UTC) - Delete It would take a lot of substantial, in depth coverage to make a run-of-a-mill IT training facility notable and this institute doesn't have it. Liz Read! Talk! 01:11, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Modussiccandi ( talk) 08:37, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
- 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.