Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EDUCANG

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. - Mailer Diablo 11:42, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] EDUCANG

Nonnotable institutional neologism, delete --Peta 04:25, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep It's not a neologism, it's the name of an institution that owns and operates a number of notable educational institutions. - Richfife 04:44, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep Per above. --dtony 07:09, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
• Weak delete, not a neologism, but fails WP:CORP with a feeble 96 distinct Google hits and few other remarkable aspects. By the way, the article about the only one of these 'notable eductaional institutions' with its own entry badly needs a rewrite ("our Middle School"?). Fram 07:25, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Reply Lack of a wikipedia article does not mean lack of notability. The schools in question appear to cumulatively have an enrollment about 3000. They are conservative religious schools, which probably explains the low Google hit count - Richfife 22:00, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. I would treat this organization as if it were a governmental school district, which is probably the closest comparison available. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 23:37, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete: - This is their website, which gives absolutely no information other than acting as a portal to the 5 schools concerned. Are they notable? Fails WP:CORP to me. LOUD COMPANY NAME ALSO! (but that has no bearing on my decision). -- Longhair 12:10, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Longhair 00:33, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
• This is not a neologism, although it is an acronym. It is a company name and as such I would need a bit more information to decide why to delete, keep by default for me as I cannot see the harm in recognising a body which runs schools... Ansell 00:43, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Longhair. Arbusto 22:16, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as spammish-non-notable-per-WP:CORP oddity. --Storkk 23:27, 22 September 2006 (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.