Deletion of List of EQUIS accredited institutions

Comment: First of all, there is nothing in  which applies to this list.  Second,  is not only a mere essay, it also doesn't apply, since this list is not indiscriminate; it has perfectly binary inclusion criteria, and it's also not trivial.  First, let's talk about notability.  The ''only'' relevant guideline here is , which tells us that a list is notable "''if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources.''"  That is obviously going to be the case with any legit accrediting consortium, and it's the case with this one.  For instance, http://www.newsweek.com/insights/best-equis-accredited-business-schools-asia-south-pacific-europe-middle-east-africa Newsweek, https://www.ft.com/content/c821f1a0-c053-11e6-81c2-f57d90f6741a Financial Times, and so on.  Furthermore,  tells us that categories and lists complement one another.  There are tons of categories based on accreditation association, just for instance, :Category:Universities and colleges in the United States by accreditation association.  In short, this list is notable, it's not a guide, it's not cruft, it's the kind of thing which complements many existing categories, and so it should be kept. Special:Contributions/192.160.216.52|192.160.216.52
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTGUIDE||WP:LISTCRUFT||WP:LISTN||WP:CLN)

Comment: kudos for explaining how this is a valid list. I personally think this is a valid list of bluelinked educational organisations (sub-faculties are not notable, but all the universities are). No one seems to give  any respect, but it does apply here
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates (WP:CLN)