Talk:Warnborough College

Separate articles

Seems like we should have separate articles for Warnborough UK and Warnborough Ireland. (They can prominently point to each other.) The rationale: the two institutions are distinct corporate entities, are in different countries, are separately accredited (or lack thereof), have different offerings, etc. What do you think? TimidGuy (talk) 17:43, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

I think the single article still makes sense, since it's clear that all of the schools called "Warnborough", now and in the past, are closely intertwined.
In that connection, this 2003 legislative transcript from New South Wales indicates that "Warnborough University" was operating at that time out of Newcastle, NSW, Australia. The previous year there were indications in an Australian national government source[1] that "Warnborough" was operating in Malaysia (also that Brendan Tempest-Mogg was in Australia and offering unaccredited educational programs through a company in New South Wales). It appears to me that the Malaysian and Australian operations should be included in the article. --Orlady (talk) 18:21, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Seems like original research to mush everything together. I think the article is very confusing as it is. Now that Warnborough UK is accredited we really need to talk about the two schools separately, rather than intertwine them. It has its own legitimate identity -- even being granted accreditation at the premier level. Maybe a first step would be to change the organization of the article away from its current chronological approach and have clearly separate sections for each of the schools. For one thing, we don't want to give the impression that the Warnborough UK accreditation somehow legitimizes Warnborough Ireland. TimidGuy (talk) 18:39, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Also, now that Warnborough UK is accredited, we ought to give the same sort of detail regarding their offerings as every other Wikipedia article about a college. TimidGuy (talk) 18:51, 11 January 2009 (UTC) And the focus of the article is exclusively on distance ed, but Warnborough UK also offers in-residence education. TimidGuy (talk) 18:55, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

The article is confusing because its topic is confusing. The various Warnborough institutions have a very sketchy and confusing history. It would become even more confusing if an attempt were made to write separate articles about each of the different apparitions of "Warnborough" institutions over the decades. Moreover, the notability of this topic derives primarily from the history -- particularly the notoriety received in the 1990s. I think, for example, that Warnborough UK in its present manifestation (i.e., as a school in Canterbury that offers local and distance education courses in topics such as bookkeeping and hotel management) would not be sufficiently notable by itself to have an encyclopedia article.

I would not place much significance on the "premier level" of the school's ASIC accreditation. It appears to me that ASIC accreditation at the premier level affirms that this is a legitimate educational institution (a very important affirmation not to be trivialized), but it does not indicate that the school is authorized to grant academic degrees or that its coursework meets any particular quality criteria. --Orlady (talk) 19:05, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Seems like any accredited school is notable in its own right. The process is very rigorous, involving a thorough audit onsite that I believe is done over a period of days. All of the school's processes are looked at, faculty and students are interviewed. The premier level is an indication of quality. "Colleges which are deemed by the Accreditation Committee to have satisfied a number of indicators of commendable provision in identified sub-areas in each Area of Operation will be awarded a commendable grade for that Area and those colleges which are awarded commendable grades in at least six Areas, normally including Areas B,C,D and E, will be awarded Commendable overall. These colleges will have ASIC Premier College status."[2] TimidGuy (talk) 20:15, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Orlady 100%. Other than their long history of controversies, I seriously doubt that any of the various incarnations of Warnborough would be notable enough for an article here. Further, it is hardly "original research" to treat the various incarnations of Warnborough together. Both Warnborough (IE) and Warnborough (UK) claim to have their origins in Warnborough (Oxford); Warnborough (IE) characterizes them as "independent colleges under the Warnborough brand" Fladrif (talk) 18:59, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Regarding OR, I was referring to Malaysia and Australia. But once I looked at Orlady's source, I don't see that it meets WP:V. In my experience, educational institutions are generally considered inherently notable from the secondary level on up. Many podunk high schools have Wikipedia articles, and most of them aren't notable. TimidGuy (talk) 20:48, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

We all have a sense of what is and isn't "inherently" notable, but in the end notability is still based on third-party reliably sourced coverage. For most individual incarnations of Warnborough, that coverage is very thin. As for the Australian Government sources I mentioned, they are not sources of information on what Warnborough was or wasn't actually doing, but they are very reliable sources on what certain Australian Government officials reported regarding Warnborough. For schools with many incarnations, it's not uncommon for articles to mention "sighting reports" such as those. --Orlady (talk) 22:44, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

I think it's a good point that Warnborough is marketing the two institutions under the "Warnborough brand" as Warnborough Worldwide. TimidGuy (talk) 01:30, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

While I don't think that separate articles are appropriate, I do think that the article might make a little more sense if it was reordered a little bit. I'm thinking that it might make more sense to use the one existiing subheading for Warnborough (Oxford) as-is, and then, instead of the "Distance Learning" and "Accreditation" captions, reorganize that material into two new headings: "Warnborough(IE") and "Warnborough (UK)", with each separately treating their respective histories, offerings and accreditations or lack therof. Fladrif (talk) 21:17, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Fladrif. I think this is a good idea. I had been thinking of suggesting something similar. TimidGuy (talk) 19:09, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Suppose we do something like this:

Warnborough University

In 1997, following the closure of Warnborough College in Oxford, Warnborough University registered as a limited company in Ireland, directed by Brenden Tempest-Mogg and Kee Guan Ng, a Malaysian national[1], and registered a branch office in the UK. It initially operateding out an office in London, and later moved to Canterbury. It offered graduate and undergraduate residential and nonresidential degrees in liberal arts, scientific and professional studies. In November 2005, the Department of Education and Science said that Warnborough University was in breach of the Universities Act 1997 by calling itself a university, and requested that they not use the word "university" to describe themselves.[21] In January 2006 two separate companies were established in Ireland and the UK, respectively, under the Warnborough College brand.

Warnborough College (UK)

Warnborough College (UK) is located in Canterbury, Kent. Warnborough College (UK) issues certificates and diplomas in a number of short-course vocational and personal-enrichment subjects.[17] It does not offer degrees, as it does not have the educational accreditation necessary to be a chartered university in the U.K.[16], which is a requirement to offer recognized British degrees.[18] Warnborough's distance-education bookkeeping courses lead to Level 1 and Level 2 certification from the Institute of Certified Bookkeepers.[19] Warnborough College (UK) is a member of the Association of Business Executives (ABE) and offers tuition services for students sitting for the ABE short courses, covering business management and tourism and hospitality. [20]

Warnborough College (UK) was accredited in December 2008 by the Accreditation Service for International Colleges and is designated a "Premier College." [22]

Warnborough College (IE)

Warnborough College (IE) currently has offices in Dublin, and offers undergraduate and graduate degrees in a variety of disciplines.

Warnborough College (IE) rented offices from All Hallows College in Drumcondra for two years from 2006 to 2008. In February 2008, the Irish Independent reported that All Hallows officials were concerned that Warnborough had falsely represented itself as linked to All Hallows, which had no involvement in Warnborough's academic programs or arrangements. At All Hallow's request, Warnborough removed photographs of All Hallows from its website. All Hallows said that it would not renew Warnborough's lease after August 2008.[1]

Warnborough College (IE) courses are not recognized by Ireland's Department of Education, HETAC, or the National Qualifications Authority of Ireland (NQAI). In February 2008, Sean O'Foghlu, chief executive of NQAI told the Irish Independent that because Warnborough College is not a recognised higher education institution or awarding body, the qualifications are "effectively worthless." [1]

In July 2008, the Higher Education and Training Awards Council (HETAC), an accrediting body for Ireland's third-level educational institutions, denied Warnborough College (IE)'s application for accreditation because Warnborough failed to agree to quality-control procedures, which was the first step in the accreditation process.[23] Warnborough College (IE) sought leave to take judicial review of the denial, [24]but withdrew its appeal in November 2008 after HETAC agreed to permit Warnborough to submit a new accreditation application.[25],

Warnborough College and Warnborough University degrees are not accepted in Texas,[26] Oregon,[27] by Michigan civil service,[28] Maine [29]. A Warnborough College degree is not accepted in South Korea for purposes of obtaining an E-2 Visa.[30][31]

Thoughts? Fladrif (talk) 22:18, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

In terns of the writing and clarity, I think it's intelligent and well written. I guess ultimately I'd like to see a different order for the sections: put the current Warnborough iterations and their offerings first, followed by a history section. Especially now that Warnborough UK is accredited. I think that most other college and university articles are organized this way. I'd like to put in more information about Warnborough UK's offerings. It's much richer than the article would suggest. TimidGuy (talk) 16:16, 17 January 2009 (UTC) But overall, nicely done. I'm an experienced writer, and have an appreciation for good writing. TimidGuy (talk) 16:29, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind words. But, I have to disagree about the order of the article. My entirely unscientific survey of Wikepedia college and university articles give me the impression that most open with a short intro, followed by a history, and then with more detail on the current offerings, progams, etc... I'm sure that this "rule" is observed most often in the breach. But in this case I think that having the article in this basic order makes the relationships between the various Warnborough incarnations much easier to follow than if the order was reversed. But, I'm willing to be proven wrong. Fladrif (talk) 16:58, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Oops. You're right. How about emulating the structure of such articles, putting the history in a History section, so that the current offerings are clearly distinct? See UCLA as a random example. TimidGuy (talk) 17:40, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Makes sense. I'll add a "History" heading, and make the Warnborough(Oxford) and Warnborough University entries as second-level headings under that. If I can figure out how one does that. Fladrif (talk) 18:37, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

The new layout for the article looks great. Good and factual too. Well doneDegreemill (talk) 11:25, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Fladrif. It's amazing how much these recent changes have improved the article. And even helped move it in the direction of NPOV. TimidGuy (talk) 16:34, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

There must be two seperate articles, one on WCUK and one on WC Ireland, since they are two seperate legal entities. We have looked at other wikipedia articicles on colleges and not one of them notes anything negative - for instance have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canterbury_College,_Kent

These articles are all promotional with colleges advertising themselves and no references are cited at all. Yet the focus here has been a campaign to discredit Warnborough, and limit anything that is positive, or play it down. We are requesting that we be given the same rights as other colleges to promote ourselves devoid of gossip, hearsay, negatives and bias. Otherwise, we suggest that negatives be put up about other colleges - rapes on campus, founders ex-cons, student violence, faculty and staff complaints, etc. etc. The list goes on and one. Why should we be victimised? Warnborough (talk) 06:30, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Apologies if we seem hot under the collar, but we feel strongly that Warnborough be given the same treatment that is being allowed other colleges on Wikipedia.Warnborough (talk) 06:46, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Please see WP:OTHERSTUFF. Regardless, few universities and colleges have the complex institutional history that the Warnboroughs have had. However, there's plenty of precedent for covering multiple incarnations of one institution in a single article. See University of Phoenix, Corinthian Colleges, Inc., Bryant & Stratton College, and Warren National University, to name just a few. Also, although there are continuing problems with affiliated persons (not unlike yourself) who attempt to eliminate all negative content from university articles so that the articles can serve as student-recruitment brochures, Wikipedia strives to maintain a neutral point of view, which often means including negative information that is supported by reliable sources. --Orlady (talk) 18:35, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the interruption. I agree with Orlady that there is plenty of precedent for treating all of the various incarnations of Warnborough together, particularly where, as here, there have been a dizzying array of Warnborough legal entities over the past 35 years, incorporated in multiple jurisdictions around the world, but all with common and overlapping owners, officers and directors. Even Warnborough's own promotional materials characterize the two current incarnations of Warnborough as part of the same "brand" and with a common history going back to the original Warnborough House College.

To suggest that the Warnborough page, or any page, should be "promotional" or "advertising" is contrary to the Wikipedia policies prohibiting exactly that. See WP:PROMOTION WP:NOTADVERTISING And, it is factually inaccurate to claim that negative information is not included in articles for other schools. See, for example United_States_Air_Force_Academy#Controversies, Southern_Methodist_University#Athletics, or Virginia_Polytechnic_Institute_and_State_University#Massacre

The complaint about "hearsay" is misplaced. Wikipedia isn't a court of law. It generally doesn't permit reliance on primary sources, but requires reliable secondary and tertiary sources. WP:PRIMARY Thus, any properly-sourced information in a Wikipedia article is necessarily "hearsay". What I have yet to see here is a convincing complaint that any the cited sources are unreliable per Wikipedia policy. Fladrif (talk) 19:36, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

ASIC accreditation for Warnborough UK

It looks like Warnborough UK has achieved accreditation with the Accreditation Service for International Colleges (ASIC). Congratulations to Warnborough; this is a significant indication of legitimacy, although it is not the kind of "accreditation" that indicates a school can award academic degrees. Someone has added the fact of this accreditation to the article, but the article also needs to say when the accreditation process was completed (apparently this was very recent). One would expect a press release or news story announcing this, but I can't find any online sources for the accreditation other than the list on the ASIC website. Can anyone supply this information and a source? --Orlady (talk) 18:21, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Accreditation was awarded in late December 2008, and is for 4 years, and Warnborough College (UK) achieved Premier College status. A Press Release will be out in due course. Remember, Warnborough College (UK) does NOT award degrees. All degrees are awarded by Warnborough College (Ireland) a sister college that is undergoing HETAC accreditation. WarnboroughWarnborough (talk) 23:31, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

External Links

It seems to me that the external links cited in the article should be changed. I would delete the link to the Warnborough (IE) FAQ page on the basis that it is an internal page on the main site already listed. I would delete the link to the Oregon Office of Degree Authorization page, on the basis that the page is already referenced as a footnote to the article. I would consider adding a link to the Warnborough Alumni Association website. Thoughts? Fladrif (talk) 16:18, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Good ideas. TimidGuy (talk) 17:59, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Done. Fladrif (talk) 18:53, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Australian Recognition or Lack Thereof

We went around about two months ago about the deletion of the statement that "Warnborough degrees are not accepted in ....Australia." I don't know who originally listed Australia or what the original supporting citation was for that statement; I did find a citation for it not being on the NSW list of approved institutions, but that cite is now a dead link. Brown, George, "Protecting Australia’s Higher Education System: A Proactive Versus Reactive Approach in Review" Proceedings of the Australian Universities Quality Forum 2004 There is, however, a cached version in HTML via Google: Cached Version

But, here are two additional sources that support the statement:

Questions on Notice (April 3 2001), a report from the Austrailian Education Minister to the Australian Parlaiment that neither Warnborough University nor any of its consortium members were accredited in Australia.

Submission 96 (September 9, 2005) A letter from the President of Warnborough College/Warnborough University to the Joint Standing Committee on Migration complaining that Warnborough graduates were being denied employment in Australia because it wasn't on the list of recognized institutions.

I should think that the part about Warnborough degrees not being recognized in Australia ought to go back in, with these citations. The first is a reliable secondary source, and the other two are reliable primary sources which confirm the accuracy of the secondary source information. Thoughts? Fladrif (talk) 22:29, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I may have originally added that, based on a news report in The Australian, which I believe I found using Lexis/Nexis. I'd have to search my computer to find it again. The citation seems to have been lost. One problem with using cached web pages as a source is that maybe a web page has been deliberately deleted because the information is no longer current. TimidGuy (talk) 11:25, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Warnborough still does not appear on the AQF Registerso it would appear that the information about lack of recognition continues to be current. Fladrif (talk) 14:50, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Anyway, the article need not be written solely in the present tense. For example, information from 2005 could be presented in wording like this: "As of 2005, Warnborough graduates were ..." That does not say anything that is not supported by the source, because it does not indicate whether or not the situation has changed since 2005. --Orlady (talk) 15:41, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

The article from The Australian that TimidGuy cited is referenced Here It looks like, at the time NSW put together the list based on the unauthorized use of "University" in the name. Now, it doesn't appear to have a list of banned schools, but rather a list of recognized schools (a much easier list to maintain, I would think). Warnborough isn't on the current list of recognized schools. Fladrif (talk) 16:07, 20 January 2009 (UTC).

Seeing that Warnborough DOES NOT offer programmes in Australia why would it be on any list? Also, we noted that Oxford is not listed, nor is Yale, Harvard, Princeton and thousands of other 'recognised schools'!!! Warnborough (talk) 03:41, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps one reason this information is relevant is because in 2003 it was reported in the New South Wales Parliament that Warnborough was operating in New South Wales.[3] There I go again, relying on published sources instead of personal knowledge! --Orlady (talk) 04:00, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

And another reason would be that Warnborough does in fact purport to offer programs in Australia through a half-dozen Australian "consortium partners" listed on its website, one of whom - Health Schools Australia - actually claims on its website that its "Bachelor of Neuropathy" degree is being issued by and is accredited by Warnborough!!! [4] Fladrif (talk) 16:04, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Warnborough, please review the warnings on your User page. I reverted your most recent edit because your changes lacked Reliable sources. They could also have been reverted because of your apparent conflict of interest. Regards, TallMagic (talk) 04:10, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Here is the result of a search for "Warnborough" in "The Australian's" archives. The full text of the articles require a subscription or a paid service like Lexis. Warnborough's and other similar institutions' lack of accreditation was a huge issue in Australia in the 2000-2003 timeframe, garnering much press attention and resulting in a crackdown from NSW and Australian national authorities. Fladrif (talk) 21:28, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Warnborough, I would like to reiterate and amplify TallMagic's comment. Since you have an apparent conflict of interest, although you are allowed to edit the article, the policy advises that you are very careful to adhere to Wikipedia policies and guidelines. That includes Wikipedia's core policy on verifiability, which says that all information that's added must be sourced. While many college and university Wikipedia articles don't source much of their content, it's important in this article because the topic is somewhat controversial and because the article is receiving much scrutiny. According to the policy on verifiability, which states that "Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves," your website could be used as a source for information about Warnborough UK's academic offerings. But claims you inserted, such as being the first in the UK to receive a particular ISO certification, would probably need a third-party source. Some of the information, such as ISO certification, falls into a gray area between the extremes of straightforward info and claiming to be the first. We can use the Reliable Sources noticeboard to get feedback on this. But for now, a first step would be for us to add some basic detail about Warnborough UK's offerings. TimidGuy (talk) 17:37, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Lead/Intro

I'm not thrilled with the changes here. I think that what was here before was clearer, and did conform to the Wiki guidelines on lead sentence. But, I don't care about it enough to play with alternative language myself. Others may be sufficiently interested to do so.

One thought to consider in revising the lead-in (and this has implications for the body of the the article): The description of Warnborough (IE) gives the impression that there is a physical presence in Dublin more substantial than a tiny office suite in a highrise. And, subject of course to the constraints of [WP:RS] and [WP:NPOV], it would appear from its website and from those of its "partners" that Warnborough(IE) not only offers distance learning, but also on-site tuition at "learning centers" run by its various "consortium members" around the world, an ever-changing list of institutions of questionable provenance. This is a pattern and business plan that the various prior incarnations of Warnborough followed once it got away from the semester abroad model and into the degree-granting racket. Fladrif (talk) 19:17, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

For those interested in Higher Education and the history of universties we suggest looking at the history and founding of Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard and other top universties. It was not easy going for them, and the founder of Harvard was in prison twice! Even my college at Oxford went bust a few times over the ages - but all these institutions perservered because they had dedicated and committed leadership, faculty and alumni. Warnborough (talk) 02:17, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

We are requesting that other relevant information about WCUK not be deleted as this information is sourced and is part of what we do and who we are. Warnborough (talk) 02:17, 29 January 2009 (UTC)