Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hillsong International Leadership 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 in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge to Hillsong Church. Daniel (talk) 08:12, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Hillsong International Leadership College

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Does not, and will not, meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for organizations.

Hillsong College is the training program of Hillsong Church. Since the creation of the article a decade and a half ago, there has not emerged sufficient coverage in reputable independent sources (press releases from Hillsong Church do not count) to justify its retention. There are, to be sure, occasional passing references in news media -- for example, there was a recent flurry of articles about a graduate of Hillsong College who died of COVID-19 after publicly deriding the vaccine -- but the overwhelming majority of news coverage tends to be either plainly tangential (as in the previous example) or focused on Hillsong Church (with the "college" merely an afterthought).

Under the general notability guidelines, Hillsong College does not have much of a chance. If regarded as a college or university, it is true that "[m]ost independently accredited degree-awarding institutions have enough coverage to be notable, although that coverage may not be readily available online." (WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES.) However, I have to question that point as well: institutions of higher education in Australia are regulated by the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency. Hillsong College is "accredited" by the Australian Skills Quality Authority, which regulates vocational education in Australia. I can think of no similar training program with a Wikipedia page -- there are "vocational education" organizations with Wikipedia pages, though most of those are closer to polytechnic institutes and overlap heavily with other realms of higher education -- the closest that I can think of in terms of specialization is Hamburger University, and even then there are any number of reliable sources from which to choose. Hillsong College has none.

The article itself has changed little since its creation: unsourced, with occasional bursts of enthusiasm from new editors (some of whom may have been affiliated with Hillsong), reverts of the most egregious promotional material, and some occasional small grammar edits. Nobody has found a single reliable source on the subject despite the fact that the article's been online since 2007. I suggest deletion and a redirect to Hillsong Church. RexSueciae (talk) 05:12, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete or prune down and Merge/Redirect to Hillsong Church. It is not notable alone. --Bduke (talk) 07:27, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:34, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:34, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:34, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:34, 26 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect to Hillsong Church. Not notable in its own right.  Aoziwe (talk) 04:21, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect - though I disagree with the conjoined premise that it, "Does not, and will not, meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for organizations." Does not? Sure. Will not? Ever? Disagree. Plenty of things that weren't notable last week are this week. That said, such an argument is usually used to suggest salting a title and the nominator certainly hasn't suggested that here.  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 07:56, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete do not Redirect this training program is not strong enough to require a link. This appears to be one of many weak subarticles all of which are promotional-and contain fair use image copyvios. ClemRutter (talk) 08:26, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - WP:ATD doesn't let you delete if an appropriate redirect is available (as it is here). Deus et lex (talk) 10:57, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Hillsong Church--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 04:07, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep or Redirect First, did anyone actually do WP:BEFORE. I found a number of mentions in relation to Lenz: https://ministrywatch.com/former-staff-members-say-hillsong-pastors-fund-lavish-lifestyles-with-member-gifts/ https://nypost.com/2020/12/10/ex-hillsong-members-accuse-church-of-exploitation-homophobia/ https://religionnews.com/2021/01/05/hillsong-dallas-lead-pastors-who-helped-plant-nyc-location-with-carl-lentz-resign/ and https://www.christianpost.com/news/hillsong-dallas-lead-pastors-resign-after-15-years-with-ministry.html which are not enough to support an article, and I found this attack blog: https://www.apprising.org/2014/05/13/homosexuality-removed-from-hillsong-college-student-handbook/. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:11, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, I did look into the subject before I nominated this article. Nobody contests that Hillsong Church or Carl Lentz are notable, and they've got their own articles already. So far, though, I have been utterly unable to find any source on Hillsong College that goes beyond a mere "trivial mention". RexSueciae (talk) 17:42, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I did not mean to impune your efforts. I did not read that you had made a search so that was a bad assumption on my part. I already noted that the incidents in relation to Lentz were passing mentions, and that is the reason I hedged my opinion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:46, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I see, no worries mate. RexSueciae (talk) 21:32, 30 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Merge to Hilsong Church, while also only keeping what is well sourced and justified based on the needs of that article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:39, 30 July 2021 (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.