Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/South Coast 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 keep. Withdrawn with a consensus to Keep after a WP:HEY by Grand'mere Eugene (non-admin closure) Britishfinance (talk) 21:10, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

South Coast College

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promotional. No decent references or evidence of notability Rathfelder (talk) 16:18, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Rathfelder (talk) 16:18, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:29, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:29, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep pending a full discussion of the relevant notability standards for college and university articles (as have been developed for high schools). The institution is included in the U.S. Department of Education's databases and it receives federal financial aid so it's certainly a real, legitimate institution. It's also accredited (by the Accrediting Commission of Career Schools and Colleges). We keep articles for (real and legitimate) high schools regardless of the available sources but I don't know if we've ever had a similar discussion about post-secondary institutions. I think it would be very odd to have different standards and expectations for high school and college articles so deleting this article for lacking evidence of notability is not recommended. ElKevbo (talk) 16:41, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: First, the text as it stands now is not promotional, and most of the facts the facts have citations to WP:RS. I'd like to see a discussion among the Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools community and the WP community at large about the use of multiple non-trivial secondary sources like accreditation and governmental approval documentation as valid WP:RS evidence in lieu of media articles. For this article specifically, I did find some newspaper articles on newspapers.com:

"Future for Court Reporters Bright, School Head Predicts". Independent Press-Telegram. 1968-05-05. p. 75. Retrieved 2019-12-25.
Silver, Sheryl (16 Nov 1995). "New software creates careers in 'rapid data entry'". Los Angeles Times. p. 106. Retrieved 2019-12-25 – via Newspapers.com.
"Woman's Rise Out of Poverty". The Los Angeles Times. 1995-11-16. p. 106. Retrieved 2019-12-25.

I will also search for the previous titles of the college, just planning to spend the rest of Christmas with my grandkids!

— Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 21:48, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:UNI would be the more appropriate project to discuss this (and an invitation to to the Schools community would also be very helpful and welcome!). ElKevbo (talk) 22:04, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete In 2017 we decided against default keeping of all articles on high schools just because they exist, and we need to apply the same logic to colleges. We need secondary sourcing, not just proof of existence.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:46, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If this is not a directory I think we need more than proof of existence for schools, colleges and universities. Rathfelder (talk) 19:34, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I added some content and secondary soures. Cheers! — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 02:17, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's improved it thank you. Happy to withdraw my nomination. Rathfelder (talk) 11:58, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Adding my keep !vote to the above, per improvements. BD2412 T 20:53, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.