Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Swat

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. Sandstein 18:50, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Swat

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

Article contains no credible assertion of notability. References consist of a single link to the organization's web page. No evidence of meeting WP:GNG. KDS4444^Talk 16:44, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:32, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:32, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:32, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —☮JAaron95 ^Talk 08:33, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Certainly passes GNG despite issues with references. Newly re-established education board after the military operation. The Pakistani boards (almost all of them) do not have news coverage except for their academic results. Faizan (talk) 10:34, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it is notable per Google search. Nominating for XFD is pointless. Umais Bin Sajjad (talk) 10:27, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep likely if this can be improved from familiar sources. SwisterTwister talk 06:57, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Both keeps here aren't all that compelling so relisting for another week –Davey2010^Talk 00:31, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 00:31, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete: I am quite horrified about the apparent lack of any references on majority of these education boards. Do we really need a separate article for each single one of them? These seem to be administrative organizations of trivial importance. The main article for the Pakistani education does not give me any reason to believe these boards would have any inherent notability. Ceosad (talk) 05:22, 7 October 2015 (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.