Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Henley Management College


 * 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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was KEEP. Paul August &#9742; 02:47, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Henley Management College moved to Henley Management College, South Africa
Commercial plug for a non notable "business school". jmd 04:06, 23 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. Business schools are notable. Grace Note 06:47, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Does this mean I can pay $50 to register a business, and in the "Nature of Business" box on the form write "Business School" and then I can have my own WP entry? jmd
 * That and get a bunch of people attending it. ··gracefool |&#9786; 08:21, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * keep This is an post-graduate level institution and we don't delete high schools. CalJW 07:04, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep needs expansion and reference back to very well-known UK parent. Dlyons493 07:59, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - institutes of further education are notable enough IMO. CLW 08:19, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep I am sure we will get the usual batch of "NN" and "crap" and "this article sucks" from delete voters.--Nicodemus75 11:25, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Don't be so negative! &hearts; purplefeltangel ( talk ) &hearts; ( contribs ) 11:30, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I am not being negative. When voters repeatedly tag their "delete" votes on school articles as "crap", "NN", etc. it is merely a statement of opinion that we will see more of the same, based upon frequent and long-standing occurance. I have already assumed good-faith, but certain editors clearly do not demonstrate good-faith with commentary of this nature, as well as multi and mass-nominations of schools to AfD. The comments I have made should be assumed to be in good faith, since all they do is predict AfD voting patterns based on previous and extensive history.--Nicodemus75 12:09, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * You're getting all bent out of shape for nothing. This is a post-secondary institution, not a high school. android  79  12:19, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I am not "bent out of shape".--Nicodemus75 12:22, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Sheesh, man, not even one person has said anything about deleting this article. Chillax! &hearts; purplefeltangel ( talk ) &hearts; ( contribs ) 19:31, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Stay tuned.--Nicodemus75 19:38, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Post-secondary educational institutions are generally notable. android  79  12:19, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keepas an accredited graduate business school. I am wary of some private business schools, that lack accredition, and just want a plug, but this isn't such a case.  --rob 16:26, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * By whom is it accredited? and what are the credentials of the acrediting body? jmd
 * Keep, business school, notable, needs cleanup and attention but undoubtably salvagable. Andrew pmk | Talk 17:32, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep notable Amren (talk) 20:35, 23 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Actually, in this case, I'd say that it should be deleted, but not because it's a school. Post-secondary schools are all worthy topics and all encyclopedic, but this particular article is written so poorly as to be nearly incomprehensible.  It became part of what UK college?  It has only offered an MBA?  What?  The article is a mangled mess, and it would be better to have silence than gibberish on the topic.  Geogre 21:29, 23 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep if expanded Im too much of a deletionist I need to vote keep for once. If not Expanded Delete --Aranda56 22:12, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, NN crap. This article sucks. Keep, although it obviously needs a good, solid cleanup. Lord Bob 23:59, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Nice :-) But your name isn't Dunc. It doesn't quite have the same ring to it.--Nicodemus75 00:02, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Is there a need to take pot-shots at other users like this? - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 08:21, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Post-secondary schools (particularly graduate schools) have a greater potential for individuality and notability than primary and secondary schools. Weak keep, though, because I don't see how individuality or notability is demonstrated here. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 02:18, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep (past consensus has been to keep schools, see Wikiproject Schools archive and arguments to keep schools ··gracefool |&#9786; 08:19, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep institute of higher education so notable enough for me chowells 17:58, 26 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Suggestion: This article should be changed, to mainly cover the "home" school in Britain, and then list/describe the local programs (AACSB accredited and well known).  If/when desired, a separate per-country articles can be made.  It doesn't make sense to make an article for the this, before the parent.  Any per-country article would obviously need to have it's article name qualified, to avoid mistakes like the John Madejski article pointing to the wrong place.  --rob 21:34, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep per Schools/Arguments. You cannot force volunteer editors to create articles in the order you dictate.  There's nothing wrong with this one as is.  We should be encouraging this type of participation.    Un  focused  22:01, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually the creator picked the title, which the content should follow. If they wanted one just for South Africa's campus they should have called it Henley Management College, South Africa.  Right now the combination of the content, title, and category is ambiguous at best.  Saying "There's nothing wrong with this one as is" makes as little sense as the article.  Anyway, I see little point in voting, if there's no agreement as to what's being voted on.  I abstain.    --rob 23:19, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Anyone can move the article, even while under AfD, provided the change is noted in the AfD section header and the links to the AfD discussion are double-checked and preserved.  Un  focused  02:47, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nonencyclopedic -- red stucco 09:06, 27 September 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.