Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Australian National College of Beauty

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. Consensus is that the article does not meet the notability guidelines. Davewild (talk) 17:45, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Australian National College of Beauty[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

non notable vocational school in a chain. Non degree-granting, and therefore cannot properly be called a college. DGG ( talk ) 14:56, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

College has different meaning in different settings and does not necessarily imply the awarding of degrees, e.g. Lake Ginninderra College (http://www.lakeonline.act.edu.au/) - offers year 11 and year 12 secondary classes in Canberra, Australia - does not offer degrees or any form of tertiary education.P.saladino (talk) 00:03, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Grahame (talk) 00:44, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There are no sources and it does not appear to meet notability guidelines. The use of the term "College" is a red herring. Many educational institutions in Australia that are not degree granting, including many private secondary schools (see Scotch College for 4 with the same name for a start), have College as part of their name. --Bduke (Discussion) 00:59, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete only degree awarding institutions are inherently notable. this one only offers diplomas. LibStar (talk) 03:39, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Laureate International Universities, since the College is owned by education provider "Think Education", itself part of the "Laureate International University" group. In response to DGG argument that the college is "non degree-granting, and therefore cannot properly be called a college"; a College don't have to be a degree awarding institution to be called a college. There are several non-degree awarding colleges in the world and in fact some of them have article here, perhaps they met WP:GNG which this one under discussion does not meet thou. In real sense, a College is any of a number of independent institutions within certain Universities, each having its own teachers, students and building. Wikic¤l¤gy^{t@lk to M£} 07:41, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:11, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Private providers are an increasingly significant part of the Australian tertiary education system, and it's an area we should have coverage of. It's very odd that both the nominator and Bduke are talking about high schools because it has "college" in the name: that is completely irrelevant to the issue of having articles on private tertiary providers. Specifically oppose redirecting to Laureate International Universities, which doesn't even mention that it owns education institutions in Australia. The Drover's Wife (talk) 07:36, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You misunderstand me. I was saying that the nominator's argument about Colleges was not relevant because there are plenty of Colleges in Australia that are not degree granting like this one. I agree that private providers are an increasingly significant part of the Australian tertiary education system, but they need to be notable and that is the issue here. I am not seeing notability, but will change if some one finds some reliable sources. --Bduke (Discussion) 09:18, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bduke what do you think about redirect? The Drover's Wife; I earlier suggested Redirect per this source and this one. Although I felt it should have a stand-alone article but I can't find enough sources to support a stand-alone article. If you can provide enough reliable sources that established the subject notability, I will gladly change my decision from Redirect to Keep. However, the claim that the subject of the article is part of "LIU" may not be included in the article, Laureate International Universities as at the time the page was created but reliable sources establish that its part of "Laureate International Universities" the sources I provided above for example. In the same vein you misinterpreted Bduke's comment above. I and Bduke is saying that the nominator's argument about Colleges is ridiculous and invalid as rationale for deletion. Wikic¤l¤gy^{t@lk to M£} 09:41, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like LIU is a bit far removed and that it'd be better to delete if that's what it comes to. I feel like Think Education probably is notable as a business with major national operations, and might make for an acceptable merge/redirect if it existed (since it could cover this as well). I am not that enthused as to want to write it, though. The Drover's Wife (talk) 11:13, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete College - whats in a name in Australian usage the term varies greatly to describe places of education, high schools to vocational certificate providers its also used to describe accommodation and study areas on some universities the term itself is irrelevent to this discussion as it correctly applied. Such a poor nomination should be closed on being out the scope of reasons for deletion but looking at the sources there are no independent sources providing substantial coverage as per WP:GNG and WP:RS for this reason it should be deleted. Gnan garra 03:53, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Notability hasn't been established. - Shiftchange (talk) 21:25, 20 June 2015 (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.