Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Academic Colleges Group (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:31, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Academic Colleges Group
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Declined CSD. Concern is lack of notability and closeness (although, on further consideration, not sameness [i.e. no G4]) to a previously deleted version (visible in history) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:02, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Please restore the wiki page and let me introduce new references (as the user Crisco have seen already, because I submitted the link to him before). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starjim (talk • contribs) 01:19, 23 July 2012 (UTC) — Starjim (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * On Behalf of the Academic Colleges Group I can say that we gathered enough links from recognized institution which provides the desired notability. You can check yourself around New Zealand Education ministries and related Education institutions that our Group, ACG is accepted and approved for Education services (some of the top schools of New Zealand belongs to the ACG group).
 * The page is already restored if you want to add those links you left on my talk page. No comment as to whether they are reliable, independent sources — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:27, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. Adding those links now. Have a good day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starjim (talk • contribs) 01:31, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - Tough call, this one. On the one hand, most of the refs are to the website of an organization that has a vested interest in this school, Cambridge International Examinations.  On the other hand, there is a reasonable variety of other cites, and the "world's best high school" award does seem significant, although I am not familiar with "Eduvac," the website on which this award was reported.  Overall, I'd say we should err on the side of caution and keep this article for now, unless someone points out more problems with the Eduvac cite and other non-CIE cites.  Ebikeguy (talk) 02:44, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I have more links yet to add, but I'm taking the time to see where they can fit the better. Regarding the Eduvac website, you can find the same information in other places as well: Isnz.org.nz Scoop.co.nz http://mag.digitalpc.co.uk, even a youtube video of the ceremony can be found. The information is there, we just simply need to put things in order.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starjim (talk • contribs) 03:32, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - Perhaps if you focused more on the credentials of the organization naming this school the "world's best high school," rather than the source of the citation, other editors would be willing to give you a bit more flexibility in the referencing source. I would definitely mention the award in the body of the article.  Just a thought.  Cheers,  Ebikeguy (talk) 03:37, 23 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the help Ebikeguy. By now I'm a bit afraid though, of being called as a "self promoter" if I mention the school awards. Anyway I will keep trying until we get it right. Cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starjim (talk • contribs) 03:54, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment: Language Travel Magazine appears to be an advertiser-funded serial targeting 'study travel advisors' staff in schools who advise student on which foreign/remote schools to attend. The awards appear to be their in-house awards for advertisers. Certainly the "world's best high school" award seems mre like the "best school targetting foreign students for English eduation who happen to advertise in this magazine" (that news story also appears to be based on an interview, undermining it's independence). Note that  even if it were awarded by a credible awarding body, the "best high school" award cannot be used to support the notability of this company anyway since all the high schools operated by this company have their own articles and notability is not inherited (the award could be used on the high school's article, naturally).  Stuartyeates (talk) 07:17, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I've just noticed that according to what looks like the official results ACG were both the sponsor and winner of this category in the awards. Any pretense of indepedence just left the building. Stuartyeates (talk) 07:26, 23 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment: there are two offical-looking references in there to agencies of the New Zealand Government and . Unfortunately the agencies are those with the prupose of marketting New Zealand overseas (general exports and education respectively). These are marketting materials and do not confer notability in the wikiepdia sense. Stuartyeates (talk) 07:31, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

My question is, how can you still have doubts about ACG notability? The facts are presented here. Furthermore:     And these ones, stating very clear their approved condition:. Please remove the deleting sign at the top. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starjim (talk • contribs) 21:18, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Struatyeates, that does not matter. Why? if you go here:, which is the National Ministry of Education of New Zealand, and if you write any of the ACG school names .. you will see them appear as a approved. The notability should act under common sense. One link from the ministry should be enough, and it's pretty easy for you to find. Even easier than digging on exportnz.org and educationnz.org.
 * I suggest you read WP:GNG and WP:CORP, which are the criteria in use here. WP:42 summaries these are "Articles require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." The entry at http://www.business.govt.nz/companies/app/ui/pages/companies/654443 doesn't grant notability either (though it does raise the question of whether Sir John Graham's name is being used appropiately). These are Run-of-the-mill. I also suggest you double-check your links work. Stuartyeates (talk) 22:03, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I'll keep improving the page. Cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starjim (talk • contribs) 22:44, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. So let me see where are we standing now: by now you know that ACG schools are veridic, but we are still having fixes to make to present the article in the proper maner. What links should I delete? I looked at the award page, and although it says "sponsored by" (that is something that I don't understand why), we didn't sponsor it: it was an election between many school agents of the world. Otherwise wouldn't have much of a sense to have that award (even less having a list of nominees).
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:52, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:52, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

I showed to you that Academic Colleges Group is recognized by IBO, NZQA, NZEM and more. If you are telling me that isn't enough ... I wonder if wikipedia should have any school at all, and yet I can find many other NZ private schools there as well. I've read the "Run-of-the-mill" article and I disagree: this is not a mall, a game match description or something trivial. This is a sum of schools. Parents and students visit the wiki page to find relevant information about their institution and schools. Don't delete the page! Tell me instead how can I improve it. Cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starjim (talk • contribs) 21:20, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete as failing WP:CORPDEPTH and lacking in-depth coverage by independent reliable third party sources. Stuartyeates (talk) 05:44, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No delete! Or you should then delete every private school that are been shown in Wiki pages as well? I presented reliable verifiable sources from the New Zealand Education Ministry, Stuartyeates.
 * When you say " This is a sum of schools." do yo mean that you're proposing deleting/redirecting ACG Senior College, ACG Parnell College, ACG Strathallan ACG Sunderland School and College, ACG International School Vietnam and ACG International School Jakarta and merging the content into this page? If so, I'm happy to run with that.  Stuartyeates (talk) 00:35, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * If we merge the pages will be a lot of content into one page in the future. Having the links between the schools was really helpful for the students so far. They all stumble into the main ACG one, and then an according their need of information visit the different schools or go elsewhere. I know if confusing, a group of schools like this is one of a kind in the world, actually. I'm proposing for you to tell me how to improve all these schools without deleting them (every time you delete a page we have parents and students complaining about it and requesting us to write the articles again, and there is a reason for that: many facebook pages and websites use the information stored in the wiki articles automatically). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starjim (talk • contribs) 01:28, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * If you want some pages for your students and parents, get yourselves a website (I suggest starting at Category:Web hosting), Wikipedia is categorically not for this, see WP:NOTWEBHOST. Stuartyeates (talk) 02:48, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

You tell me instead, why wikipedia has schools pages and do not delete them? Is the same reason why applies to our case. After seeing the NZQA, NZEM and IBO links, do you still think that ACG is lacking of notability? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starjim (talk • contribs) 03:10, 25 July 2012 (UTC) — Starjim (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * We have a website already (and its very huge: 3600 internal pages), so this WP:NOTWEBHOST is not the case. We don't want to use wikipedia as a website.
 *  Merge  (replaced with keep further on) with the other ACG sites as StuartYeates suggested. The college may reach a point where these other colleges are significant enough in their own right. The article needs work but should not be deleted. Starjim, on another matter if you work for the college you have a conflict of interest which needs to be declared. Have read of WP:COIN if you haven't already done so.NealeFamily (talk) 06:49, 26 July 2012 (UTC)NealeFamily (talk) 22:34, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. The schools this company runs are notable as verified secondary schools. Is the company itself notable? I'm honestly not sure. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:26, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Imagine if two different Universities belong to the same group of people, but they are in nature very different with each other... would you merge their wiki pages? Same happens here. How shall I use the COI? If I'm involved today is because of the editing that all the pages are having, and the request of parents and students. About the impartiality, you are taking good care on that. I'd would like for other to write in behalf of ACG schools, but now I understand how hard is to work something with you all. User Necrothesp, the schools are the company, it's not a separated thing. The owners are all teachers as well. And you said "the schools are notable" however many moderators have deleted the pages once and again. It's very difficult to discuss the matter and reach a conclusion when many moderators are taking part of the discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starjim (talk • contribs) 22:14, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Response Starjim maybe it would be helpful if you outline the organisations structure and relationships. Correct me if I am wrong - the Academic Colleges Group is a holding company under whose umbrella the various schools are run as independent entities (that is they are independently managed from one another). As Necrothesp stated the schools are generally notable as of right, but the holding company may not necessarily be so, because its notability can not be inherited from its ownership of schools. To put it another way, just because I own something, ie a rare and notable car, that does not give me notability. The car may be notable, but I am not if my notability solely depends on my owning the car. I would need something else that gave me notability in my own right.


 * You also say it is difficult to deal with so many moderators - well I guess that is part of operating within a community. There are many views held by the communities members, hence the various discussion boards and pages such as this. Those who oversea these pages are wise enough to assess the arguments put forward and reach an appropriate decision with regard to retaining or keeping an article. It is not majority rules.


 * From your comments - if you feel pressured by job, parents, etc then given your close involvment with the organisation I would advise against direct editing, because of a probable lack of neutrality. Hope this all helps NealeFamily (talk) 07:26, 27 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm receiving written content from them (parents, sometime teachers and), and then ensemble everything. The problem that they face is that their content usually gets deleted, because of the lack of references or the way they have written the article. That's why they contacted me. So nothing written there is mine, although I'm performing some editing for making this content survive the wiki regulations (with references, links and discussions with the moderators). Thank you Neale. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starjim (talk • contribs) 21:43, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * When you click the edit button there's some text that says By clicking the "Save Page" button, you agree to the Terms of Use, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license. Have you been getting the OK from them to do this, since they are the copyright holders? Stuartyeates (talk) 21:50, 29 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Absolutely. They are the holders but they, as we are too, are only interested in keeping the information of the whole group of school up. We have a community towards ACG, very aware of everything we do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starjim (talk • contribs) 23:30, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Really? I'm not seeing any OTRS templates on the talk pages of articles I'm aware you've worked on. You're following Requesting copyright permission, right? Stuartyeates (talk) 00:38, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

I wonder, Stuartyeates, what kind of future awaits Wikipedia if we have this kind of endless wave of bureaucracy for just adding a simple lines of text? Where is the common sense? I'm seeing you throw me every kind of wiki regulation, but the essence of what we are talking here seems to eludes you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starjim (talk • contribs) 02:57, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Stuartyeates, we are talking about known people towards ACG schools, who gladly give me some part of the content, sometimes paragraphs, sometimes a fix in a sentence, sometimes a suggestion. When they let me handle the text material it becomes ours, I'm the one who press the button "save page",
 * This hypothetical wikipedia free of copyright concerns presumably exists in a world in which Kim Dotcom is not being extradited from New Zealand for this very same offense, copyright infringement. Stuartyeates (talk) 05:40, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Also one that ensures Wikipedia remains meaningful and not a repository for self promotion.NealeFamily (talk) 08:02, 30 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Seems a non-notable group. Any relevant info can be merged. Mattlore (talk) 10:05, 30 July 2012 (UTC)


 * It's not about free copyright, but just talking about this particular case. Kim Dotcom was wanted by USA mainly. New Zealand provided justice, and the extradition was part of americans wishes...sorry, the world doesn't run like that anymore.

Non notable group? Question: what kind of information can we add to make it "notable", in this particular case? Can somebody point me in the right direction please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starjim (talk • contribs) 20:56, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * As has been explained above, indepth coverage in reliable, independent sources is the core to notability. Stuartyeates (talk) 21:17, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Also: Or even for Sir John Graham: Another newspaper: All of them referring to the existence of the ACG Group, and in many of them telling the role that this Group has towars Nz education. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starjim (talk • contribs) 22:07, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * For example, the NZ Prime Minister visited ACG in his trip to Vietnam, for being a NZ company, and was reported by an independent source
 * Have you tried clicking on those links? None of them work for me... Stuartyeates (talk) 23:46, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=34&objectid=10683973&ref=imthis http://www.nzherald.co.nz/education/news/article.cfm?c_id=35&objectid=10397912 http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=150253 http://www.nzherald.co.nz/college-sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=153&objectid=10675198 http://www.nzherald.co.nz/play/news/article.cfm?c_id=1502915&objectid=10641050 http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10799086 http://www.nzherald.co.nz/employment/news/article.cfm?c_id=11&objectid=10473948 http://www.nzherald.co.nz/honoured-new-zealanders/news/article.cfm?c_id=513&objectid=10730484
 * Ok let me post them again:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/5565534/ACG-wins-international-award http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/ED1202/S00015/acg-strathallan-top-of-the-top-in-cambridge-examinations.htm http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/ED1101/S00039/acg-school-tops-cambridge-examinations-awards-list.htm http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/ED1006/S00014.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starjim (talk • contribs) 23:54, 30 July 2012 (UTC)


 * These are good solid references and will lift the notability of organisation. I'll review my position on the article in the next few days. You still need to watch your own conflict of interest aspect though, especially if the organisation gets negative press at any point of time. NealeFamily (talk) 09:21, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your time Neale. Once the group and schools get their place, I will leave and let others to edit the content of these pages. If some negative press arises and someone post it .. well they are entitle to it. Although should provide consistent relevance from an independent source, such criteria applies to all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starjim (talk • contribs) 23:51, 31 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - a few of these latest sources seem to meet WP:N, but given the lack of discussion on them, I didn't think the discussion should be closed until they're discussed. Wily D 07:42, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
 * e.g., 12 Wily D
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:11, 1 August 2012 (UTC)




 * Weak Keep – Just meets WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:GNG per:
 * Private school prepares to triple its roll
 * ACG Group Wins Exporter of the Year Award
 * ACG wins international award
 * ACG Strathallan top of the top in Cambridge Examinations
 * ACG School tops Cambridge Examinations Awards List
 * No ordinary school show
 * — Northamerica1000(talk) 01:22, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Modified my !vote above to weak keep. Struck overlooked press releases. Northamerica1000(talk) 11:39, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Lets see:
 * Private school prepares to triple its roll Yes, some notability accruing for ACG Parnell College, but not much since this is an interview-based story with all those interviewed being associated in some way with the school. Note that notability is not inherited from that school to this company.
 * ACG Group Wins Exporter of the Year Award This is a press release
 * ACG wins international award This is a news story based on an interview with a spokesperson about winning an award. As pointed out above, the award was sponsored by the company. The title of the award implies it is for a school rather than a company, but the coverage is insufficient to determine which of ACG's stable of schools it was for.
 * ACG Strathallan top of the top in Cambridge Examinations This is a press release
 * ACG School tops Cambridge Examinations Awards List This is a press release
 * No ordinary school show This is a press release
 * I'm seeing excellent marketting, but no notability. Stuartyeates (talk) 02:32, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Private school prepares to triple its roll "The ACG, which also has schools in Karaka and central Auckland, has a waiting list at its Parnell College and has had to turn away up to 100 students a year in recent times." This article talks about ACG and one of his latest schools, ACG Parnell. There is not "inherit", the interviewed are part of ACG Group: "The associate principal of the Academic Colleges Group, Kim Harase, said parents were not deterred by the fees, which range between $10,000 and $13,000 annually." You are mistaken here.
 * Stuartyeates once again you missed the point:

ACG Group Wins Exporter of the Year Award Yes, it's a press release.. but it was approved by an independent source. Same as other press releases: they show that the ACG Group is notable, recognized by them.

ACG wins international award Special attention to this point: Stuart states that "was sponsored". I tried to tell you many times that you misunderstood the whole thing: it is pointless to be the winner of a prize you are paying for!!! The "sponsor" means THIS. Has nothing to do with the election of the winners! Do you understand now? ACG was elected by many school agents around the world. Winning this prize (many, during the last years) it's a great element to support the notability of the ACG Group. "The title of the award implies it is for a school rather than a company" Completely wrong!! The title talks about ACG as a whole. What are you reading?!: "An Auckland-based group of schools has taken out 'best high school' at an international award ceremony on the weekend" the article said. This is crystal clear... the group as a whole, like talking about 1 school .. won the prize.

You see marketing, I'm seeing willingness of deleting beyond reason instead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starjim (talk • contribs) 03:07, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that link, I don't believe I've seen it before. The bit where it says "Pre-STM Star Awards: [...] Logo on all printed voting forms" confirms that sponsorship buys votes. Stuartyeates (talk) 06:52, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep despite the mix of self promotion, there seems to be enough to bring this organisation within reasonable range of notability. They are new in relative terms to other educational institutions, but the colleges seem to be establishing a reasonable reputation, probably because they appeal to richer members of society ;), but that is usually the case. NealeFamily (talk) 08:49, 2 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. On balance, I'm coming down on the keep side. Large company running schools which are notable enough for articles. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:53, 2 August 2012 (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.