Talk:Delphi Schools

Accreditation

None of the schools operated by Delphi Schools, Inc. are accredited. Justanother (talk · contribs) has recently white-washed the accreditation section of this article by trying to argue that the schools are licensed, or that the schools in question are merely K-9 and don't require accreditation. It is true that no school is required to receive accreditation. It is a voluntary process that almost all private primary and secondary schools go through. The reasons that schools, students, parents, teachers, and employers value accreditation are laid out in the article School accreditation.

The Delphian School in Oregon is not accredited by the state of Oregon, which does provide an official list of all the accredited primary and secondary schools. The other Delphi Academies in California, Massachusetts, and Florida are also not accredited by the recognized regional accrediting bodies.

Claiming that the schools are "licensed" is not the same as accreditation. A license to operate is just that. It doesn't mean that an independent accrediting body has examined the curriculum, faculty, and facilities and determined it to be appropriate. A license just means that the state isn't going to put anyone in jail for running the business. The requirements for a state "license to operate" and for accreditation are different -- and that is why all of the schools that Delphi Schools, Inc. runs remain unaccredited.

I have reverted the whitewashing attempts by Justanother. Vivaldi (talk) 23:21, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Yes, the accreditation status certainly belongs in the article. I merged both of our edits and believe I have struck a decent balance. I removed the editorializing we both did. Oregon is on an accreditation track and that is shown. IMO, this is not really deserving of pounding into the ground. These are generally small schools and have chosen not to pursue accreditation. --Justanother 02:36, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"notability disputed"

A user has been placing "notability disputed" tags on Scientology-related education subjects, apparently misunderstanding that their notability is not just for their own sake, but as they relate to Scientology. wikipediatrix 02:17, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of the External link to The Delphian School ESL program

External links

The Delphian School ESL Program ESL program

User Tilman has removed 3 times the following External link I put and that shows how the ESL is an important activity of the School: here and here for instance with the use of Straw Man arguments or "reasons". User seams unfaily biased (see user talk page) against Scientology related articles and this even though this articles is just about a school using Scientology Study Technology. - Jpierreg (talk) 01:02, 29 November 2006 (GMT)

Yes, and I will remove it again. Wikipedia is not a link farm for the different programs (swimming, chess, study technology, clay art, whatever) of that self-proclaimed scientology "school". One commercial link should be enough. --Tilman 08:51, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delphi Schools, Licenced by Applied Scholastics, not a Scientology-related entity so not a Scientology Series

Grateful acknowledgment is made to L. Ron Hubbard Library for permission to reproduce selections from the copyrighted works of L. Ron Hubbard. Delphi Schools, Inc. is licensed to use Applied Scholastics™ educational services. Applied Scholastics and the Applied Scholastics open book design are trademarks and service marks owned by Association for Better Living and Education International and are used with its permission.
— Delphi Schools, Copyright Information

Though Applied Scholastics is a Scientology-related entity, Delphi Schools are not mentioned directly or indirectly, by law, as being a Scientology-related entity. The Scientology Series template is not valide here since it is misleading -- Jpierreg 20:05, 21 Feb 2006 (GMT)

It has not been said that Delphi is a "Scientology-related entity" as in the IRS agreement. Same applies to Tom Cruise and Cyril Vosper. Yet, the scientology template applies, because it is a scientology related topic.

Btw, the "L. Ron Hubbard Library" is just a business alias for the Church of Spiritual Technology, which is the managing entity of scientology. --Tilman 20:37, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you agree that the Church of Spiritual Technology is a managing entity only as far as Copyright is concerned? -- Jpierreg 06:25, 22 Feb 2006 (GMT)

We're getting away from the topic. --Tilman 07:21, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To support your justifications as "a related topic", you've made the claim of saying "just a business alias for the Church of Spiritual Technology, which is the managing entity of scientology". However I see nowhere that the Church of Spiritual Technology is -the- managing entity of scientology. This looks to me not only as a WP:OR but a controversial statement. --Jpierreg 03:04, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]