Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Language & Business Centre


 * 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. The gist of the discussion is the tension between our propensity to keep secondary schools because we always do that (i.e. WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES) and the desire to hold private schools to the higher standard of WP:NCORP. There is some thought here that the distinction between public and private schools may represent an ethnocentric view of things which isn't valid in Asia. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:04, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

International Language & Business Centre
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Previously kept because it exists, this company providing educational services does not meet the requires of WP:NCORP. &mdash; Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 21:19, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:32, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Myanmar-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:32, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:32, 24 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete - I agree that corporations that own schools are not subject to the general consensus that schools are notable and must meet NCORP. This doesn't. John from Idegon (talk) 19:14, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
 * An independent school organisation that provides mainstream education at all levels including GCE O-level and university entrance as stated on its its website. Thus it is a high school. --Phyo WP (message)  04:25, 27 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep per The Myanmar Times press. That strong one!! clearly seen notable. EpcMyanmar (talk) 19:19, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
 * NCORP requires multiple reliable totally independent secondary sources that discuss the company in detail, at least one of which must be either a widely circulated publication such as a book or national level magazine or from a geographically separate location. You've shown one source that discusses one event from a local source.  How does that meet NCORP, ?  John from Idegon (talk) 20:00, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Research does not support enough third party coverage, most search results are directories/lists or press releases. Earnsthearthrob (talk) 20:39, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Strong keep: ILBC school is the name of private high school with many campus in major cities with significant coverage in news. This article typically meets secondary school notability. It is not the name of parent company so we should not consider according to WP:NCORP.    The English language sources  indicate notability as a secondary school, not as a company that owns schools. However, I am concerned about possible copyright problem. --Phyo WP  (message)  04:06, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry, no. Whereas the individual schools might be notable, the company that owns them does not garner notability from that (see WP:INHERIT). A manufacturer does not become notable simply for making notable products. A real estate investment company does not become notable for owning notable properties. And references about schools that this company owns do not speak to the notability of the company. Someone can and should write articles about the individual schools and those topics would likely be notable. The company that owns them, no. John from Idegon (talk) 07:36, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Absolutely not. Both primary (website, woven badge in school uniform  and school buildings ) and secondary sources     clearly indicated that ILBC is the name of school with many campus. It is very clear that ILBC is not the name of its parent company. This article is about a high school with many campus. --Phyo WP  (message)  09:56, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Please note that it is not very relevant whether it a multi-campus school or a regional educational supplier. Either way I would have nominated it for deletion because WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES makes it clear that schools are not notable unless they either are shown to be a place meeting WP:NGEO or there is reasonable evidence to meet WP:ORGCRITE, which this organisation does not. I think there is a case to be made that state schools and accredited higher education institutions have a certain presumption of notability, this is neither and thus doesn't. &mdash; Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 13:59, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Schools are a rather unique topic and that leads to confusing notability guidelines. What makes individual schools notable is usually the organization that occupies the unique building in the unique community it is in. Hence, its notability is tied indellably to the community as a highly important social organization. Here on Wikipedia, if a school moves to a different location in the same general area, we simply address that in the article copy, as the local institution is what is notable, not the building. For public school districts, they are assumed notable because they occupy a specific place on the map, and are highly likely to have extensive media coverage due to the fact they levy taxes. The closest analogy to a private corporation that owns schools is the public school district, but they are neither constrained to a set physical boundry nor do they levy taxes. The notability assumptions about school districts simply do not apply to corporations that own schools. Again, I want to emphasize that in no way am I saying that each individual school is not notable. Indeed I'd go so far as to say they likely are, and at least one of the secondary sources you proffered would be nearly sufficient to show one of the individual schools meets the notability requirements for schools (the one with the traffic issues). John from Idegon (talk) 19:14, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. the status of the school is not apparent in the current article, but checking its website it offers education to the secondary level, with established international standards,. The consensus has been disputed, but in practice we have almost always kept such schools. The basic rationale, is that it is easier to do this than to debate each one. There might be a point even  in debating each one, if it gave rational results, but experience has shown we don't do much better than chance, because the result depends not on the merits or the references, but on who happens to appear at the discussion. As these articles are harmless, we'd do better to simply keep them and deal with the real problems . It's time we thought about what we do here, and realize that the method of consensus discussions at afd cannot deal adequately with this sort of situation.  It can deal with getting rid of junk, and keeping articles objected to on the grounds of prejudice; it can deal with trying to work with the nuances of BLP  and NCORP in instances important enough to get wide participation. But where there are a small number of determined people on each side, it's just a matter of chance what turns out to be the ratio.  DGG ( talk ) 08:20, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 17:13, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. Per DGG. A second look at the sources, cited and not, shows a clear picture of this Centre's notability. Moving behind the scenes and under more visible events, this entity should not be ignored here. Den... (talk) 22:19, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. Sufficient coverage in independent sources to meet WP:GNG. In Asia it is normal for companies to own groups of schools and these are broadly equivalent of US school districts that are considered notable and with 26 schools this is a big group. Just Chilling (talk) 20:02, 10 October 2018 (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.