Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trinity Christian School, Canberra

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. --Stormie (talk) 09:04, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Trinity Christian School, Canberra

Trinity Christian School, Canberra (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Prod removed without change to article. Non-notable school, no assertion of notability, no references. Article written in promotional style. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 12:25, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Change to Keep following the useful changes made by JERRY and after reading this [1]. I will leave this discussion going however, rather than withdrawing the nom, as others than me have suggested deletion. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 11:34, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. —Longhair\talk 17:35, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. —Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 20:58, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Blatant advert. --Paularblaster (talk) 21:07, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, "School Fee's" - I really hope they didn't have their English section write this. Promotional material for a non-notable organisation. Lankiveil (talk) 01:00, 29 December 2007 (UTC).
  • Comment Major faux-pas to use the article maintenance issues as justification for delete. If it has advert tone, then edit it. If it contains trivial information that is inherantly non-encyclopedic, edit it. It it is poorly written and non-wikified, edit it. If I was the closing admin based on the comments I've seen above, I'd close as no-concensus... no valid arguments have been made. I reserve my vote until I can do further research to determine if multiple independant reliable sources exist which discuss the subject of this article non-trivially. That is the only criteria that needs to be determined. JERRY talk contribs 14:26, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
  • I agree that article formatting issues are not a reason for deletion. My reason for starting the AfD however was non-notability. I did a Google search [2] before posting the AfD which revealed only the school's own sources, plus many listings type entries. I would have gone for speedy deletion A7, except that schools are not covered for speedy non-notability deletions. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 17:25, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Perhaps you'd better read Wikipedia:Deletion_policy#Reasons_for_deletion, and explain on associated talkpages why the first reason given there is a "major faux pas". --Paularblaster (talk) 23:52, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
NO, the second reason was the faux pas, the first reason was just plain inaccurate. JERRY talk contribs 04:30, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Despite a rewrite the article still lacks an assertion (let alone a demonstration) of notability; it still reads like a prospectus, so it still meets the number one criterium of Wikipedia:Deletion_policy#Reasons_for_deletion, and comes perilously close to criterium 11 of Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#General_criteria. --Paularblaster (talk) 14:20, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep This is a high school (k12) with over 1080 students which has a currently planned expansion. All schools of this size are surely notable, let alone all high schools can be assumed to be notable already. The article has been improved since the nom and new comments here should take into account these changes. JERRY talk contribs 05:14, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete does not reach the inclusion criteria at WP:ORG or WP:N and no other endorsed criteria exist for schools.Garrie 11:37, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Per GarrieIrons and ors. notability for the article subject has not been generated by any means, and despite the changes made it still goes against the key points of WP:NOT#DIR. If the school was notable in some way, through significant academic achievement, had a reasonable quantity of notable students, or has in some way shaped or affected the course of education delivery or policy within its region, as long as those facts could be verified and referenced, then it would be worthy of remaining. However, none of these criteria are acceptable to the article at hand, therefore no reasonable argument beyond WP:ILIKEIT can be made for its keeping. Thewinchester (talk) 14:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
  • keep Needs adding to, not deleting. I have so why not help? Victuallers (talk) 14:26, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep High schools are inherently notable IMO Hobit (talk) 17:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. From WP:N (schools), an admitted work in progress: "A school article that fails to establish notability will not be deleted, if the school can be confirmed to exist." Tanthalas39 (talk) 03:10, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - High schools are notable and article has been improved. --Oakshade (talk) 05:43, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete The article does not highlight anything notable about this high school. There must be tens of millions of high schools around the world - surely they're not all notable! --Nick Dowling (talk) 09:10, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Tens of millions of high schools in the world? Are you sure your stats are correct? With the earth's estimated population at 6 billion, let's for the sake of argument make the extremely liberal and likely over-estimation of 1 billion of the earth's population being in high/secondary school (ages 14 to 17) at any given time. If high schools have an average count of 1500 pupils (mine had 3000), that would bring a rough estimation of 666,666 high/secondary schools in the world. --Oakshade (talk) 06:27, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. Notable, article has been improved. Rebecca (talk) 07:02, 5 January 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.