Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harbert Hills Academy


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 05:04, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Harbert Hills Academy

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

The school mentioned here is not accredited by one of the regional accreditation bodies and is therefore not automatically kept under WP:NHS. Google search shows no reliable secondary sources that are primarily about this entity. This appears to be (a) promotional in nature (b) unsourced (all the sources are primary and proper citation templates not used) and (c) directly copied from www.harberthills.org piece by piece (all the sentences I specifically looked for were on the website, very bad case of plagiarism). It would require a fundamental rewrite from scratch in order be wikipedia quality even if it was considered notable which I do not consider it to be. Attempted to delete through speedy deletion and prod but was removed by an anonymous IP address which proceeded to personal attack me on the article's talk page. WikiManOne (talk) 02:20, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep i removed the promotionalism,    the obvious copyvio, and whatever seemed likely to be copyvio. The remaining stub is only very basic information, but more could and should be added--properly. I note that this is a secondary school, and all such are considered  notable for Wikipedia purposes. I have noted the  comments at the nominators user talk page.    DGG ( talk ) 03:07, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * This school is an unaccredited school meaning that it is a psuedo high school at best. Whether or not it has recognition by other schools, the fact is grades from unaccredited schools cannot be transfered making them pretty useless. Also, it appears to have less than 40 students. WikiManOne (talk) 03:50, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep per DGG. Also, I do not believe that regional accreditation has been considered a prerequisite for application of the general presumption of notability for high schools, nor should it be.  --Arxiloxos (talk) 03:37, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * There have been previous deletion discussions that have succeeded based on this.WikiManOne (talk) 03:50, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Please identify them. I do not agree that this has been the general practice. And I certainly don't think it is appropriate for you to add your interpretation to  the longstanding text of WP:NHS and then immediately claim that your changed version is the accepted one to be used oin a new AfD filed by you.--Arxiloxos (talk) 04:55, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Here is one: Articles for deletion/California School of Law. This is the first one I saw when I looked, I have seen multiple other ones that are of high schools rather than colleges however, I just don't have the time to look right now... WikiManOne (talk) 05:28, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Suggestion/Comment - Organization is a part of Outpost Centers International, perhaps it could be merged into that article? Comments? WikiManOne (talk) 04:16, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Also note that the speedy deletion templates were removed by IP address who has never made edits beyond that article where they added the plagiarized content. The IP address is located in the vicinity of the entity discussed drawing question of promotion yet again.WikiManOne (talk) 04:20, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  —Arxiloxos (talk) 06:48, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Tennessee-related deletion discussions.  —Arxiloxos (talk) 06:48, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - as per DGG, and the current  stub version  pruned by him does not violate any of our policies. It's worth noting  that  where we generally  accept  all  high  schools as de facto  notable, there are no further criteria for their size, age, accreditation, curriculum, or whether they  are public or private. The only  criterion  is that  they  provide education for ages 15 to  18, or as the Americans call it,   'Grades' 10 to  12. Maybe a future RfC will change policy to  narrow it  down, but  for the time being we have to  live with  what  we have, and that  means that we keep  Harbert Hills Academy.--Kudpung (talk) 08:41, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The issue with that is that non-accredited high schools do not actually provide grades 9-12, they provide a psuedo education that is generally not accepted at accredited high schools and usually not by colleges putting whether they actually offer those grades in question. WikiManOne (talk) 14:18, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Neutral, leaning towards keep Precedent at the college/ university level says that an institution who provides a legitimate education but is unaccredited for religious reasons should still be regarded as notable and kept, while unaccredited schools providing questionable or non-legitimate services, such as fly-by-night, for-profit career schools who do not offer degree programs, or are outright fraudulent (i.e. diploma mills) should not be kept, unless they satisfy the general notability guideline through non-trivial, secondary sources. From what I've gathered about Harbert Hills, it seems to me that if the school were a college, it would fall into the former category, which is why I lean towards keeping 2 says you, says two 17:06, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Outpost Centers International. Lacks multiple reliable and independent sources with significant coverage. I do not agree that such a school automatically gets the de facto assumption of notability recently given to public high schools and accredited private high schools. It is surprising that news sources have not covered a school with a commercial bakery, a nursing home and a powerful FM radio station, on a 500 acre campus. Edison (talk) 20:15, 17 October 2010 (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.