Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of unaccredited institutions of higher learning

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 of the debate was consensus to keep. Johnleemk | Talk 13:10, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

List of unaccredited institutions of higher learning

This is really two articles: an article on unaccredited higher education, mainly in the US and Canada, which is a useful adjunct to School accreditation and the like, and a more questionable list of red Wikilinks inviting creation of these. In my view the few blue ones could be handled through a category, the encyclopaedic content moved to Unaccredited institutions of tertiary education or some such, and the list (which the article acknowledges has issues of verifiability) is of no encyclopaedic value. That is my view, anyway. But I don't want to just hack at it, and once the article is split I don't think the redirect is required. Just zis Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] (W) AfD? 15:46, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Watching for links here turning blue is actually a useful way to monitor the creation of new articles on diploma mills, provided they are in the list to begin with; if the creator is particularly clumsy, he will also try to remove the name from the list. I have a few articles on diploma mills on my watchlist and revert them whenever somebody tries to turn the text into an ad blurb or just blank a too critical text; as Wikipedia articles usually get decent placement in a Google search, this happens quite frequently. Some of the degree mills in the list are or have been notorious frauds with press coverage; I added a couple of new names and links to articles on the BBC website just the other day. Please note that there is also an article called "diploma mill". u p p l a n d 16:10, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You just know that tickles my sense of humour, don't you? :-) - Just zis Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] (W) AfD? 16:30, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for same reasons as u p p l a n d cites - there was a recent example of just that. I would accept the long-winded preamble being moved out into another article, but the list should remain. --Red King 16:41, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I buy that. What should the title be? Give me a good steer on that and I'll move for early closure and do the needful. - Just zis Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] (W) AfD? 09:44, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

We should consider restructuring both this article and the diploma mill article (and possibly other related pages) but it is probably better to discuss that on the talkpage of one of these articles. u p p l a n d 08:53, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as useful list as per Uppland. Capitalistroadster 17:03, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Best to keep things together, and categories do not replace lists. CalJW 18:41, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — may be a useful and interesting list; encyclopedic. — RJH 01:25, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very interesting page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.205.152.11 (talk • contribs) 08:11, November 28, 2005
Keep the list and Merge the rest with diploma mill. If necessary, create Unaccredited institutions of higher learning. Actually, might want to move diploma mill to that and redirect it there since it is less of a POV title. Peyna 05:48, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Also, the long-winded preamble is necessary to put the whole list into context and safeguard Wikipedia from any legal issues. Elf-friend 07:19, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per u p p l a n d – Clockwork Soul 07:21, 30 November 2005 (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.