Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashurst Primary 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 merge. I have redirected to Blackbrook, Merseyside; knowledgeable editors are encouraged to merge relevant, verified information. seresin | wasn't he just...? 07:19, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Ashurst Primary School
This surely comes into the category of a Non notable primary school? Paste (talk) 14:18, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. ♥Shapiros10WuzHere♥ 14:50, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- Keep. Verifiable and plenty of independent sources (e.g. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/education/06/school_tables/primary_schools/html/342_2021.stm) --Oldak Quill 15:10, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- Comment You can find these tables on every single school in the UK, this link has zero impact on whether or not a school is notable.Paste (talk) 18:02, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- I didn't make any comments relating to the guideline Wikipedia:Notability. I simply made the point that there are independent, trust-worthy sources available; that the article is verifiable. If you want to talk about notability, I guess evidence for its verifiability has implications for its notability per "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." (Wikipedia:Notability). --Oldak Quill 18:15, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- Understood, but the point I am making is that every school in the UK has a page such as the one you highlighted. Indeed I should have thought that every school in the UK can have a page that can verify its existence. I thought that there was general acceptance that for a primary school to have an article it needed to have some evidence of notability and this school clearly does not.Paste (talk) 18:27, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- Encyclo-pedia. Encyclo, that means "includes all". If the source is verifiable there's no reason not to have completeness. It makes Wikipedia actually useful - David Gerard (talk) 00:59, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Please review WP:NOT (specifically WP:NOT#DIR and WP:NOT#INFO) and realize that wikipedia should not be "complete" simply extensive. Adam McCormick (talk) 00:28, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- Encyclo-pedia. Encyclo, that means "includes all". If the source is verifiable there's no reason not to have completeness. It makes Wikipedia actually useful - David Gerard (talk) 00:59, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Understood, but the point I am making is that every school in the UK has a page such as the one you highlighted. Indeed I should have thought that every school in the UK can have a page that can verify its existence. I thought that there was general acceptance that for a primary school to have an article it needed to have some evidence of notability and this school clearly does not.Paste (talk) 18:27, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- Don't confuse notability with importance. There are reliable, independent sources to demonstrate WP:NPOV, V and OR, which are the inclusion requirements. DoubleBlue (Talk) 19:19, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- I didn't make any comments relating to the guideline Wikipedia:Notability. I simply made the point that there are independent, trust-worthy sources available; that the article is verifiable. If you want to talk about notability, I guess evidence for its verifiability has implications for its notability per "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." (Wikipedia:Notability). --Oldak Quill 18:15, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - don't be silly - David Gerard (talk) 00:59, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Merge User:David Gerard is going against the consensus established at WP:SCHOOLS, which is to follow WP:N, and if the article fails that, to merge it to the school district or town article. Additionally, there is a general consensus against Wikipedia being a compendium of all knowledge. Lord Uniscorn (talk) 06:53, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- I'd say "delete", but the forces of inclusionism say Merge. Pretty clearly this is just another lower school. Mangoe (talk) 12:01, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. —Camaron | Chris (talk) 12:54, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Merge to district and redirect article. Seriously, we can have a permanent stub here, or we can redirect effort toward having a great district article. I want to see a good district article! CRGreathouse (t | c) 13:59, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Merge/redirect - to its locality, Blackbrook, Merseyside. TerriersFan (talk) 16:37, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Merge/redirect to the Blackbrook, Merseyside article. (Note: The UK does not have school districts.] Dahliarose (talk) 09:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Merge - to its locality, Blackbrook, Merseyside. It is not only the 'inclusionists' that support merging. Having good district articles or settlement educational sections is a worthy goal and throwing out material may not always be the best use of everyones time and effort. Vegaswikian (talk) 00:18, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
- 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.
