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. alphaChimp^(talk) 20:39, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to me to be non-notable diploma mill. Author effectively acts as he owns the article, and while I hesitated to propose it for deletion (because he took the "use my version or delete it" position, and I do not wish to further it), on second thought I felt that the organization is simply not notable enough. Delete. --Nlu (talk) 05:04, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, with a side of salt. For all we know, he'll upload his original draft once the article is deleted. I would also like to suggest fully protecting the page as it is now to prevent further disruption. Ryūlóng 05:10, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - isn't deleating at this point really just giving in to BertWoodall (talk · contribs)? I don't see how that meshes well with your statement that "[w]e will not bend to your demands". As an accredited school of higher learning, one would expect NCU to have a entry in Wikipedia -- for heavens sake we have thousands of articles about non-notable High Schools here at Wikipedia, and we are going to delete an entry about a controversial post-high school educational institution just because their PR man is being too noisy? That doesn't seem to make sense, but then I am just an anon coward, so what do I know... -- 63.226.38.202 06:00, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom Nigel ^(Talk) 12:25, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Resolute 13:48, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep in the strongest possible terms. This is an accredited university recognized by the United States Department of Education which has been the center of recent controversy. Silensor 16:14, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as it appears to fail WP:NN. Google hits are misleading due to the paid online ads. JungleCat talk/contrib 18:03, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep As a regionally accredited university at the center of recent controversy it seems like a most ideal topic for Wikipedia. Deleting the article is just a PR guy's end run around the truth. I also agree with suggestion of fully protecting the page as it is now to prevent further disruption. Highperformanceauto 18:31, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete, barely notable degree mill involved in a non notable controversy. Ramsquire 19:40, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. It's an accredited university, albeit online. --Myles Long 20:37, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Silensor. Derktar 21:45, 21 September 2006 (UTC).[reply]
• Comment - Doesn't WP:SCHOOLS apply to this article? -- 12.106.111.10 23:34, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment If you could show me some (all verifiable) notable alumni or research done, or something worthwhile, I might change my input on this. JungleCat talk/contrib 23:56, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I have changed my input on this to Neutral as a benefit of the "doubt". I would like to see some hefty references though. JungleCat talk/contrib 23:44, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Such an entry belongs in a place like Ripoffreport.com and not a forum guised as a source of valid information. Is the purpose of the Wikipedia forum to service individual vendettas, disgruntled employees, or un-informed individuals? This type of entry assumes much and does not serve as a source of valid information but as a tool of misdirection and assumptions. Silensor seems extremely un-informed with regards to the facts about NCU and can only assume that s/he has no experience with the institution directly and therefore is making unfounded blanket statements. S/he speaks of "recent controversy" as the ration for their view, but in fact the issues I can only assume s/he speaks about are historical because in truth they are related to NCU only through their former President Donald Hecht. There are no recent issues to speak of. I suggest s/he at least attempt a course so that they may avoid speaking from ignorance. There are other forums an individual may use for such recourse, this forum is inappropriate as Wikipedia might be misinterpreted to be a source of valid unbiased information on this subject. NCU has nearly 4000 students and over 600 affiliated staff. The information contained within this site serves no public interest, in only serves to satisfy a vendetta of a few individuals. If such a page must exist, it should be put under the heading of Donald Hecht as the topic and not NCU. Do the right thing. Delete this item. "B" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.116.71.38 (talk • contribs)
  • Comment 24.116.71.38 tracks back to CableOne.net in Arizona. This is the same IP used by Bert Woodall, paid NCU PR guy, who vandalized this site in the first place. This speaks for itself as a reason why this page should not be deleted but rather kept and protected. "Do the right thing," he says. What a joke. Highperformanceauto 01:38, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. We always keep accredited institutions of higher education, and we tend to keep the more notorious diploma mills. Northcentral University is indeed in the database of accredited institutions kept by the United States Department of Education. If it is actually a diploma mill, being accredited makes it somewhat unusual. up+l+and 06:02, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and protect. Hecht's involvement would probably make it more than "just a diploma mill". It is probably notable to have been fined a cool $500k for breaches of the law. As we have seen, the page will continue to come under attack. I believe that the public has a right to know about the organisation and its founder. Wiki is WP:NOT censored. Ohconfucius 06:19, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Assuming that it really is accredited by North Central, then it can grant bachelor's degrees. We have tons of articles on elementary schools... I think most any college should have an article. The content of the article is another story. In a really bad case, which this appears to be, it might be OK to just delete the article to save everybody a lot of heartache. Still, the material at least has some references. I mean, the scandals and stuff just make the college more notable. I don't see how it can go. Herostratus 06:33, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Ohconfucius and Herostratus. Angus McLellan (Talk) 09:36, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Ohconfucius and Herostratus, accredited universities are absolutely notable, there is no need to be prejudicial against those that are on-line. Yamaguchi先生 23:08, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete General information to define NCU okay. Biased information designed to slander has no relevance here. Provides no useful information regarding the institute, only historical info about founder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.228.229.179 (talk • contribs)
• Delete delete content under NCU. Keep content regarding Hecht under heading Don Hecht with link from NCU with valid NCU info. solution for both sides. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.102.186.14 (talk • contribs)
• Keep per Ohconfucius and Herostratus. JoshuaZ 23:36, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The information in the Northcentral article is accurate and should be kept. I understand that it may be unflattering, but this site is not meant to be a marketing tool. Students spend a lot of money working on their education. If the school has controversial practices, it may negatively affect their accreditation status, and thereby make degrees from the school of questionable value. Prospective students and others should be aware of this information. Bluecanada 18:13, 26 September 2006 (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.