Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Internship in India

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. Jamie^☆S93 12:50, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Internship in India (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

The article is based around the idea that a neologism "internship in india" has become popular - no evidence is presented to support this contention (and we generally don't do articles about neologisms anyway. Even if the article was about internship *in* india, it would be a content folk of internship. Cameron Scott (talk) 11:10, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah the plot thickens - it seems the term "intership in india" is one used in promotional activites by a company called educare and multiple versions of this article have been created and deleted over the last couple of weeks. --Cameron Scott (talk) 11:20, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- Abecedare (talk) 11:36, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete If at all anything of value exists in this page it can go in as part of Internship. Neither the article nor a Google search (or my past internships in India and the US) suggest any reason this is worthy of Wikipedia entry. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 16:14, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Yes, I find evidence that internships in India are becoming increasingly popular: [1] and maybe some day someone will create a sub-page of the internship page, focusing on India, and I would not object to this. But I see no evidence that this is a topic or term in itself. The current page is also highly unencyclopedic, and totally unsourced. I see no content worth keeping! Cazort (talk) 17:30, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete At first to me it seemed like yet another kid decided to use Wikipedia to write out his/her course project. Speedy any more such articles from the same user. --Deepak D'Souza 18:19, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• KEEP First, on a professional and social note, let me compliment and thank you for being at and working to keep this great 'Wikipedia'. But at the same time, let me also try and contribute to this wonderful community endeavour through few of my following observations (with no pun / offense intended) that arise from - a) your message of 'sock' to me, b) the deletion tag of the article Internship in India and the comments I read herein.

a) I'm not a sock. A friend of mine who happened to upload a few articles got blocked and sought me to look into the policy and see if I could make amends to the same. See my edits, and I have done deletions to many personal references that were used to and tried to add some more text of reference. The right way would be (in my opinion) to focus on the subject and the matter – as here in case is Internship in India. If there was an kiddish stuff being loaded by a new user, as was in the case of ib40, warn him, tell him not to create new pages. It was done. And I didn't see any pages created thereafter. And he has commented OK to follow. I wonder you people seem to focus more on user contributors first effort with lot pf biased and and manufactured mindset toned over a period of time with your on-line editorial experiences in wiki. Some observations seem like as if you people are tending to work FBI way. Watch, Expose, Shoot. b) To me, {{Internship in India}} seems a topic of as much importance and relevance and notiability as as is the case of Crime in India, Education in India, etc. Instead of spending as much discussion resources on deletions, sock identifications, I suggest some users, editors classified experts may be sought to contribute more data to it. The suggestion to move it as sub-section to Interns article is not appropriate. If you go into building the topic Internship, you need to classify it further – internship in different sectors – a) development, technical, arts, etc etc, b) paid and unpaid, c) trends and statistics, etc, Internship as a single article cannot do justice. If you have articles like Infotainment Television, Prarthana Constructions Pvt Ltd etc lying there for nothing for so long waiting for contributions, and not deleted because no one touched them to develop and enhance. However, Internship in India that certainly makes a lot of sense to retain and need let it be developed to the wikipedia standards has been proposed for deletion just because there is being attempt to improve it in response to initial tags.. If someone puts up an article, let it grow, All new users are not researchers but at times just searchers. And they create something as they felt it should be theor for reference. At the same time, I do not dispute your observations, that initially only one organisation specific citations or references were placed. But then if that is corrected to let it grow and build. But if this articles go, my house doesn't go up in flames. I have an opinion that I think is valid. I contributed, and would like to do more. And I believe I'm certainly little more cerebral than YellowMonkey after looking at the contributions and subject areas of interest.Norwe (talk) 21:12, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would have been more usefull if you explained why this article meets Wikipedia's guidlines on Notability and No Original Research instead of accusing us of being the FBI. --Deepak D'Souza 04:28, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed sock: User:Norwe has been confirmed to be a sock of the article creator User:ib40 and User:E6nvikas, and has been indef. blocked. The accounts created several COI articles to spam about the company Educare India (which offers internships in India) and its officer Baljinder. Abecedare (talk) 04:39, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete While there may be something of note to write on the topic at some point in the future if someone can find reliable sources that provide a broad overview of the topic, as it stands the article is unsourced and disputable OR - written IMO to provide a hook to spam about Educare India. It is part of a set of articles including International Internship in India , International internship programme in EduCARE India , Educare India, EduCARE India, Baljinder, , i.e.india (Internship in EduCARE India) , Ruraldevse etc that have been created, using several sock accounts, to spam about the company and its director. Abecedare (talk) 04:48, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: sock notwithstanding, the article is a)unreferenced and b)a neologism not used by any English-speaking persons (i.e., relevant or notable to the en-Wikipedia).--It's me...Sallicio!^{${\displaystyle \color {Red}\oplus }$} 04:09, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete If there were anything relevant it could be moved to intern, though it appears yet another sock User:Norwest2 is already is ahead of us there. Priyanath ^talk 05:51, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete where are the references ?? Wikireader41 (talk) 02:06, 27 May 2009 (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.