Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Premier Education Group (2nd nomination)


 * 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   no consensus. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:05, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Premier Education Group
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

The subject of the article lacks significant coverage in reliable third party sources and fails the notability guidelines for organizations. Alpha_Quadrant  (talk)  00:25, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:17, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 20:17, 4 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, → Σ  τ  c . 19:41, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Alpha_Quadrant   (talk)  00:33, 19 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Looks like there might be some paywalled coverage here, there's also this about a lawsuit. There are a number of hits on google news, mostly local papers though. Since it owns several schools with articles a selective merge there might be an option too. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:05, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep and merge. Specifically, keep this article and merge Branford Hall Career Institute, Hallmark Institute of Photography,  Salter College, Seacoast Career Schools, and Suburban Technical School into this article. These are all "doing business as" units of Premier. (Another unit that has a separate article, Salter School, has enough information in the article to stand alone.) I've expanded the article a little bit based on what I found on the web. This is a business that has had a reasonable amount of third-party coverage if you consider all of its component units. It should be covered in Wikipedia -- but it shouldn't have a half-dozen separate articles, as it does now. --Orlady (talk) 01:03, 22 March 2012 (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.