Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black Hills Beauty College

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Doczilla @SUPERHEROLOGIST 21:12, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Black Hills Beauty College[edit]

Black Hills Beauty College (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

"Schools are notable", except when they're not. While this is called a college, it's really a for profit cosmetology school, and therefore would need to meet a higher standard than a secondary school. A BEFORE indicates no such sourcing, with many results being limited to "X is a graduate of the school". Speedy declined, which I agree with (courtesy @ElKevbo:), but I am not finding any significant, in depth coverage to meet WP:ORG. Star Mississippi 23:49, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete The institution is not listed in IPEDS which is not a good sign. The institution's website claims that it's accredited but the link on the website doesn't work. In fact, none of the links appear to work. I'm not sure this institution is still in business and it doesn't appear that it made much significant impact in reliable sources, a plight likely shared by many career colleges. ElKevbo (talk) 23:56, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and all discussed above. Oaktree b (talk) 02:15, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This is a for profit, focused course, tertiary educational institution. The default notability for tertiary education in the US for starters is meant for things that have regional accredidation, national accredidation in the US is basically cases where regional accredadation is being avoided because the place cannot get regionally accrediated. Beyond this, we intend it for full course tertiary instutions, not ones that are narrowly focused on preparation for one specific career type. The later can be notable, but they have to pass our notability guidelines for organizations, which this does not. Whether it currently operates should not be notable, because notability is not temporary.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:09, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnpacklambert: Early last year, the Department of Education eliminated the distinction between regional and national accreditation; they're all institutional accreditors now with no geographic restrictions for the previous regional accreditors. ElKevbo (talk) 22:47, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Agree with all above comments and voters. Delete it. Jaxarnolds (talk) 05:00, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Per a BEFORE, there's really nothing adding to notability whatsoever; given the lack of appropriate sourcing, this article should not have been created. --Kbabej (talk) 16:37, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    In creator's defense, March 2010 was a very different time for school notability, although I'm not sure this one was ever notable. Star Mississippi 17:03, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom - nothing to show notability here. Deathlibrarian (talk) 22:00, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, isn't notable enough for an article. Suonii180 (talk) 12:15, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom fails WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:52, 14 December 2021 (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.