Talk:The Chubb Institute

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Chubb is a for-profit private college, as such it should not be subject to the debate about notability of schools since it is a tertiary-level institution and should be per se notable. Wl219 06:35, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

"db group -- schools are not inherently notable, and this one contains no assertions of extrinisc notability" (copied from the edit summary) Simply being for-profit should not confer on it any notability that it would not otherwise have. In fact, that in my mind makes it subject to the specific guidelines in WP:CORP and specifically those under "commercial organizations" since it is effectively a corporation. It falls short of meeting those guidelines in its current state. Deranged bulbasaur 06:44, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

If I recall correctly, the schools notability debate was about whether secondary and elementary schools were notable. Chubb is a tertiary institution and should not be subject to that debate. Doesn't matter that it's for-profit, WP has many articles on similar for-profit schools like DeVry University. Wl219 06:49, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Also, please see Chubb's accreditations to see that it is a legitimate, accredited postsecondary degree-granting institution. Wl219 06:52, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Mere accreditation doesn't amount to notability, otherwise every licensed professional would be entitled to his own article. Deranged bulbasaur 07:02, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

The DeVry article doesn't set any kind of precedent. In fact, that article has problems. Namely, it doesn't cite independent and reliable third party sources. It only cites primary sources (by the institution itself). Deranged bulbasaur 07:07, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Didn't you read what I wrote about the school being a tertiary institution that shouldn't be subject to the schools notability debate? You have not responded to that point at all. Wl219 07:10, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't matter whether it's primary, secondary, tertiary, quaternary, or n-ary. There is no policy distinction between those categories at present. My arguments are not grounded in the "schools notability debate" but in the *corporations* notability *guideline*. Deranged bulbasaur 07:17, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Multiple nontrivial published works: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] Are you happy now? Wl219 07:52, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

It's not a question of whether I'm happy or not. At first glance those seem to be mostly local interest, but it's probably sufficient. We'll see what comes of it. I'm done. Deranged bulbasaur 08:13, 12 February 2007 (UTC)