Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American College of Medical Technology


 * 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 keep. - Mailer Diablo 09:04, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

American College of Medical Technology
Minor diploma mill. Notable only for being a "problem school", and even then, just barely. Another non-notable from our most prolific creator of articles on non-notables. FeloniousMonk 22:37, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Do you have any evidence that this is a diploma mill? --Jason Gastrich 04:44, 24 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep Regardless if it's notable (which I think it is), this article would be of great use to prospective students.the1physicist 23:29, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per The1physicist. --Vizcarra 01:50, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Notable for being a non-notable school which self-declared itself "american" to give the impression it is the leading school of america. More like a diploma mill. Perhaps there should be something like the Jack Kevorkian American Euthanasia University.Blnguyen 04:16, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. They're federally accredited, and the information about their controversial practices is noteworthy, since it was mentioned in Congress.  I've tagged it on my watchlist, and I'll make sure that the entry isn't whitewashed. -Colin Kimbrell 15:29, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep. Accredited school with scandelous activity. Arbustoo 01:59, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Colin and Arbustoo.--SarekOfVulcan 04:21, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep since the article shows that the school is possibly fraudulent, it seems worthwhile keeping this as an example of a class of dodgy commercial trade "school". Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] [[Image:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg|25px| ]] AfD? 09:25, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Update: I don't think they are going to be very happy with their profile - I just found out that the founder was not head of the reaosnably substantial American X-Ray Corporation, the company cited (American X-Ray) is most likely to be a small business in Jackson, CA called American X-Ray Supplies - a supplies distributor. Someone with Dun & Bradstreet access could perhaps verify this.  There is no website for any American X-Ray Company which lists Donald Harrison as having been owner at any time. - Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] [[Image:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg|25px|  ]] AfD? 10:06, 23 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong keep. No evidence it's a diploma mill. In fact, it holds national accreditation from the government. At any rate, it's a notable university. --Jason Gastrich 04:44, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * The government doesn't accredit anybody. A.J.A. 05:12, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Government doesn't accredit schools. Try reading up on it next time: School_accreditation. FeloniousMonk 05:48, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * "Holds national accreditation from the government" and is "a notable university?" Neither of those things is true, which shows once again that someone around here has no idea what he's "talking" about. - WarriorScribe 06:20, 24 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Weak keep, even though it's not a university, at all. - WarriorScribe 06:06, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - 21 Google hits 19 Google hits in English despite being accused of fraud - seems non-notable. Guettarda 13:22, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Guettarda et al. KillerChihuahua?!? 14:23, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep as a warning of how not to run a school. Ruby 15:09, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmmm...you make a good point (but I still think its nn) - Guettarda 16:11, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep to show that this is a diploma mill and the controversy surrounding it --Censorwolf 16:36, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. I've added it to List of diploma mills.  I don't think it's notable, but if we delete it, then perhaps there are a lot of others that should be deleted as well?  Regards, Ben Aveling 06:53, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Colin Kimbrell. AvB &divide; talk  17:37, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep --Candide, or Optimism 19:05, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete last time I saw a nomination like this was for Louisiana Baptist University. I voted keep on the basis that while it was not accredited it was useful to have in the encylopedia for the reasons Just ziz Guy and Ruby mentioned above. Unfortunately, the LBU page became a vehicle for POV editing trying to show the university in a very favourable light despite verifiable evidence. It led to many spin off articles of many minor ministers who have a degree from LBU. It also led to a huge acrimonious RfC. In short, these types of pages seem to be more about vanity and less about being informative. For these reasons I do not think an encylopedia is the place to be writing articles on non notable institutions.  This encylopedia should stick to writing about verifiable and notable topics. David D. (Talk) 18:41, 26 January 2006 (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.