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. Unfortunately, discussion seems to have died off over a week ago. WJ94 seems to have successfully identified a few sources and has changed opinions from delete to keep, and I see that they have added those sources to the article. That leaves this debate pretty close to even, so the best result is no consensus, with no prejudice against speedy renomination if the delete !voters believe that a consensus can be reached with a second attempt. ST47 ( talk) 04:27, 24 November 2019 (UTC) reply

Adamson Institute of Business Administration and Technology (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Private institute, fails WP:NORG. Störm (talk) 06:58, 7 November 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 07:10, 7 November 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 07:10, 7 November 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 07:52, 7 November 2019 (UTC) reply

• Keep. Accredited degree-awarding tertiary institution. When I see these institutions listed for deletion, my rule of thumb is always: would a similar institution in the United Kingdom, United States, Canada, etc, ever be likely to be deleted? If the answer is no, then I do not think there is good reason for deletion (see WP:SYSTEMIC). That is, I think, the case here and indeed the case with pretty much every accredited degree-awarding institution around the world. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 13:56, 13 November 2019 (UTC) reply
• Delete Whether Pakistani, American, British, or even Nauruan, an educational institution has to have evidence of at least existing before any other notability criteria are considered. This is greatly in doubt her, since the institution's website is 404 and the Pakistani NIC says the domain registration expired in 2015. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:29, 14 November 2019 (UTC) reply
• Delete - After finding nothing through Google/Google News/Google Scholar, I did finally come across this – the Adamson Institute of Business Administration and Technology is listed as an affiliated private college of the University of Karachi. I have also come across this, which also lists Adamson as an affiliate and notes that degrees are awarded by the University of Karachi. Therefore, and in response to Necrothesp, this is not an accredited degree-awarding tertiary institution; its degrees are accredited by the University of Karachi. According to WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES, most independently accredited degree-awarding institutions have enough coverage to be notable, although that coverage may not be readily available online; this institution does not meet that criterion since it is not independently accredited. Given the lack of any further sources which would establish notability, I think we can delete. WJ94 ( talk) 18:06, 14 November 2019 (UTC) reply
• Redirect/selective merge to the University of Karachi. Not independently notable, but a sentence or two at the University of Karachi page would be fine. 4meter4 ( talk) 19:25, 14 November 2019 (UTC) reply
• Comment. Once again I see above a lack of understanding of how tertiary institutions work in India and Pakistan. Most colleges are affiliated to a university. This does not mean they are part of the university or that they are not independent institutions. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 09:08, 15 November 2019 (UTC) reply

@ Necrothesp: It turns out I linked to the wrong page yesterday (apologies for that – I had about 20 similar-looking tabs open trying to understand this!). My first link should have been this, and my second link should have been this. The second link notes that The Degree is awarded by the University of Karachi. This to me suggests that the Adamson Institute is not an independently accredited institution (I am not saying that it is a part of the university but I am saying that it does not have the ability to confer degrees by itself, independently of the university). If this were a similar institution in the US, UK, etc (ie. an institution which had its degrees conferred by another university), I would !vote delete if multiple reliable sources could not be found for it.

@ 4meter4: Since this institute is not part of the university, I am not sure a redirect would be useful, nor am I convinced that the University of Karachi's page needs a list of all the colleges affiliated with it (since it does seem to be a pretty routine arrangement in Pakistan). Having said that, I don't have strong feelings here, so I wouldn't be utterly opposed to a redirect. WJ94 ( talk) 10:47, 15 November 2019 (UTC) reply

You could have said that about any of the polytechnics in the UK before they became universities. None of them conferred their own degrees, which were conferred by the CNAA. But nobody would have said with a straight face that they weren't notable institutions. One size fits all does not work internationally. All countries work differently. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 11:02, 15 November 2019 (UTC) reply

@ Necrothesp: On reflection, I think you are right. Now we have found reliable sources to establish the existence of the institution, I think it is reasonable to suppose that multiple reliable sources probably do exist but are difficult to access online; sensitivity to WP:SYSTEMIC leads me towards wanting to keep this article. As a tertiary education institution affiliated to the University of Karachi, I expect an editor in Pakistan would be able to locate enough offline sources to establish notability. I have added the sources I have found to the article and tagged it as containing only primary sources. WJ94 ( talk) 13:39, 15 November 2019 (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.