Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashmole School
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. John254 01:04, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Ashmole School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
This school is not notable since it has not been the subject of significant coverage in secondary sources independent of the school itself. This article is full of information regarding what subject available in the school and the buildings inside the school. This should be in the school's prospectus, not Wikipedia. No viable third-party references, except Ofsted. Fangfufu (talk) 00:31, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong keep - High school, foundation school, science college, music college, Ofsted Grade 1 'Outstanding' school. [1]. UK schools don't get much more notable. Oh, and sources available to meet WP:ORG. Did I mention at least five notable alumni? TerriersFan (talk) 00:43, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- It is very hard to find anything on Google regarding the school's facilities. The information on buildings in the article seems to be purely original research. The courses being taught in the school should be deleted. There is no need to do a table. People should be able to find those in school's prospectus. I feel it is not quite encylopedic to include those. If you delete the information about the courses and the unverified information about buildings, you can almost get a blank page. Fangfufu (talk) 00:55, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The page needs cleaning; sure. But there is plenty of sourced content from which it can be expanded. We don't delete highly notable schools because the page needs work. TerriersFan (talk) 01:00, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- It is very hard to find anything on Google regarding the school's facilities. The information on buildings in the article seems to be purely original research. The courses being taught in the school should be deleted. There is no need to do a table. People should be able to find those in school's prospectus. I feel it is not quite encylopedic to include those. If you delete the information about the courses and the unverified information about buildings, you can almost get a blank page. Fangfufu (talk) 00:55, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. —TerriersFan (talk) 00:48, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. School has the best Ofsted mark you can get (only very few manage that), the school has multiple sourced notable alumni and the school has a significant history. All reasons to keep it (see WP:BEEFSTEW and WP:SCHOOLS) - Mgm|(talk) 12:09, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 03:57, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep -- The consensus is that all secondary schools are notable. A lack of sources implies tagging the article for verifcation. It is no reason for deleting it. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:29, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - agree that all secondary schools are inherently notable. Opera hat (talk) 02:00, 1 December 2008 (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.