Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Imperial Hotel Management College

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. The delete !votes present a clear majority but are also based on appropriate deletion topics such as notability and verifiability. The keeps are more centered around precedent (with no proof of solidly-matching precedent given by either side) and comparison (to Cornell School of Hotel Administration which can be reliably sourced with no work at all) as well as apparent conflict of interest. —Wknight94 (talk) 17:45, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Imperial Hotel Management College

Imperial Hotel Management College (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Delete no assertion of independent third party coverage of notability, has been twice deleted before - but not through afd. Carlossuarez46 23:40, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

• Delete for a specialized college like this, third party sources are necessary to establish notability Corpx 02:27, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment I'm not sure we have ever decided that point, or whether it falls under the general presumption of notability for higher (post-secondary) education. It's an accredited full-time school with a 9-month long program , not a correspondence school. I'm undecided myself on this as a general question. DGG (talk) 17:17, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per Corpx. --Aarktica 21:43, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Comment Assertion of independent third party coverage of notability finally added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Studentservices (talk • contribs) 22:05, August 26, 2007 (UTC)

• Keep - we haven't deleted tertiary educational establishments in the past and it is ludicrous to suggest that we should start now. TerriersFan 22:25, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I think the assumption is that we haven't deleted any public tertiary educational institutions before. However, in this case we are dealing with a private institution. A different case. Luke! 23:20, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletions. -- Luke! 23:23, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. An accredited tertiary school that is not a diploma mill. For comparison I looked at Cornell School of Hotel Administration, which is also private. Fairly obvious which school is more prestigious and which one has more sources in its article, but 'more sources' is still not very many. I'd say the Cornell school is an obvious keep, so I have to keep this one too. This is under a general presumption of notability for post-secondary education. If we had to prove notability from third-party sources, then Cornell would barely pass and this one not. EdJohnston 00:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete It's not just about sources. The Cornell school article makes its notability plain and obvious, but I don't see any here. I don't think being a post-secondary school is enough to fall into some default general guideline. It reads like a directory entry, not an encyclopedia article, and unlike lots of AfDs, this doesn't seem to be a case of the article just needing some work. I'm also guessing User:Studentservices has some WP:COI issues here, and that this article exists for promotional purposes. None of the sources SS added look like 3rd party independent sources and don't even hint at notability. bobanny 04:59, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - Its just not notable. Aside from the fact that I'm a university student that has lived in Vancouver all my life and never heard of this school, with out additional third-party sources, it looks like another advertisement of a non-notable establishment. Mkdw^talk 05:25, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep I think to be fair, if we were to let this one go, we have to be consistent and delete the many other similar post-secondary listing in BC. Many of them are not even accredited and are merely registered. Ashton College is one, King George International College another. Studentservices (talk • contribs) 06:05, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

Comment - that's not really a good reason for convincing others for keeping the article. WP:WAX - just because others exist doesn't mean this one should. Luke! 06:07, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

• Delete - nothing notable in its current state and in my search for sources. Luke! 06:07, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - As I have taught at this college, I shall stay out of this debate from this point onwards, will let others decide as what is notable is subjective. I have merely added the third party sources as initially requested.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Studentservices (talk • contribs) 06:20, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. There simply is no assertion of notability. We can probably all agree it exists (and perhaps that it is accredited), but that, in itself, does not make it notable. --Evb-wiki 15:01, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
  
• Question. An editor above (TerriersFan) suggested we hardly ever delete post-secondary institutions. Does anyone know of examples where we have deleted such an institution? (other than a diploma mill). EdJohnston 15:25, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I doubt this is the first, though I haven't researched it. Decision-making is by consensus here, not precedent, so that's not an argument in itself. I'd be surprised if a public post-secondary institution was deleted because they tend to have more ties to the community (in Canada anyway), being public and all. I also live in Vancouver and have never heard of this school. Accreditation just means they're held to a standard, and I don't see how that's a notability criteria. bobanny 15:55, 27 August 2007 (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.