Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lansbridge University

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 keep. John254 03:46, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lansbridge University

Lansbridge University (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Delete Private online university without any claim to accreditation or notability. The article smells like spam, which is fixable, but the notability issue remains. Carlossuarez46 21:19, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

• Keep Universities are notable. Liransh 21:56, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
• Weak Neutral While I personally feel that any WP:SCHOOL that has more than a couple hundred students is notable, this one does seem a bit spammy, not to mention it's a business, and not a place that's notable to the community. If it HAS an actual campus, I'd say keep, otherwise, I doubt this will ever be notable enough for an article --Longing.... 21:57, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
  • The university website explicitly state that it doesn't have a campus. Liransh 21:59, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
    • Then there's your answer. I still doubt it will be notable, but at the same time I feel strongly that, 40 years from now, anyone should be able to put in the name of their hometown and schools and get at least proof that they ever existed on Wikipedia. But at the same time, I'm conflicted because this is definitely a business, and probably not as close to people's hearts, nor is it a significant part of any community, or a geographic landmark, built in bricks up on a hill. --Longing.... 22:09, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, it is accredited[1] by the Canadian DETC which accreditation is recognized by the United States. I don't see the spam here, just a stub in pretty factual language. But the reason it passes WP:N is that it was opposed by academics and recently ordered shut. --Dhartung | Talk 22:41, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

• Wait, I jumped the gun. There are two "Lansbridge University" entities, with related ownership but separate management. One was shut down, the other continues to operate.[2] The article should probably cover both, I should think. --Dhartung | Talk 22:44, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

• • Spam was removed by subsequent edit, see recent history, but that was only part of the concern. Notabiilty still remains. Carlossuarez46 23:14, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

• Keep The previous history of this article is not auspicious, so let's go slowly. Carlossuarez notified me of this AfD, so I imagine he wants a vigorous discussion. Any tertiary institute should have an article. The requirement that it have a campus doesn't apply any more--many undoubtedly notable colleges do not. Does this open the door to any business that wants to call itself a school? I don't want to have to decide that, but if it offers degrees, or things that purports to be degrees, as this one does, then it counts. But it needs to exist--just like any other organization. This one does exist, at least according to its own website, though it would be good to have some third party RS confirming the claim that is has 200 students, & been in existence for 6 years.

I do not see that accreditation is required. We have articles on a number of unaccredited institutions--some that have lost accreditation, some that have never been accredited--and for good reason, some that have chosen not to be accredited, such as some small bible colleges. The argument has been made that it is appropriate to have articles on the unaccredited, so people have the information. But in any case this college does claim to be accredited by the US Education and Training Council, which is a recognised US national accreditor for distance programs. [3]. It accredits schools of great variety, and is recognized by the WS DOE. (in the US, "regional" accreditors accredit conventional institutions, "national" ones accredit business schools and other for-profit entities. (The relationship between the two is not harmonious, and politics is very much involved.) The ETC accredits 5 non-US institutions among its 100--some specialized and respectable, some well known and controversial, most very obscure. The US DOE of course does not control the accreditation of non US institutions directly or indirectly, or authorize anyone to do so, and the ETC website admits as much & says the US authorization does not apply to these 5. The University also claims to have passed "the required validation procedure for the MBA program on September 29, 1999 to offer an MBA in New Brunswick.

Size does not matter, we have articles on schools considerably smaller than this.

This is one of a pair of institutions with the same name, apparently owned by the same company--the other one is in British Columbia, and has been closed by the BC government--the relationship is frankly put forth on the college's web site. (If I were looking for an online business college, this would be a rather conspicuous red flag.) The material has been systematically eliminated from the present article by 156.34.149.130--but it has also been inserted by someone with an obvious bias. If we have an article, it would need watching.

What we do need is reliable information to write an article, and this is the dubious part. The first 3rd party source is the paragraph on the accreditor's web site listed. I think it sufficient to prove existence, and to establish the address and the degrees offered, and that it has been listed since 1999. It does not prove notability. The 2nd source is inclusion in an article quoted on the university's web site from "BACK TO SCHOOL: Your guide to 16 of the country's best executive MBAs The Globe and Mail, September 30, 2006. [4] Whether this is selective I cannot tell--the others are mostly excellent well-known conventional universities. Normally, we'd consider that newspaper a reputable responsible source. I also found a profile in Business Week: [5] which at least documents the number of students at 238--it also documents an entering class of 12. It's based on info from the University, but Business Week has usually been assumed to be a RS. None of these actually show notability; they all count as directory information.

But it turns out there are 2 good CBC sources, one from 2001, [6], one from 2007 [7] Read them, & you'll see why those associated with the school did not list them in the article. DGG (talk) 23:18, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

• • You should edit the article to add those reports. Perhaps we don't have to answer the underlying question whether anything that charges people money and sends them fancy sheepskins is inherently notable, because there are lots of educational software or other businesses around that provide education and certificates thereof for money. Some of these, everyone would agree are notable University of Phoenix, some in the vast middle ground, and some would require the indulgence of the community accepting the underlying question in the affirmative Carlos University where for sending me lots of money I can send out a fabulous printed degree of your choice. :-) Here, this one may survive in the vast middle ground closer quite far from the universal agreement side. Carlossuarez46 23:32, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I should have done so. I've now restored the sourced part of the earlier content, and added the refs. from here. DGG (talk) 05:10, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

• Keep per above consensus, as universities, even online ones, are presumed to be notable, unless shown otherwise by verifiable sources to be a diploma mill. This article can be fixed per WP:HEY. Thank you, DGG. Bearian 21:25, 3 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.