Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unity Christian High School, Barrie

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 Delete consensus is delete, even while establishing a guideline the basic premise of reliable sources would still be applicable within that. Gnangarra 17:10, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unity Christian High School, Barrie

Unity Christian High School, Barrie (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

No independent sources for this school to establish its notability that I could find. There is no notability guidelines for schools yet, thus the fact that it is a high school does not make it inherently notable. Therefore, the guideline to follow is WP:N, which I see no evidence of this school meeting. Cheers, CP 00:19, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Addendum I fully support merging and turning this into a redirect, if that's what the consensus would prefer, as well. Cheers, CP 19:19, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

• Delete no evidence of notability, unsourced. JJL (talk) 00:26, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. The article fails to establish any notability for what appears to be a very small school indeed. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 00:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Doesn't come within a mile of meeting WP:N. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:13, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletions. -- A. B. ^(talk) 01:32, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete No signs of notability. TJ Spyke 02:52, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
• Redirect per Policy Debate. I see a rather difficult problem here. Wikipedia:Notability (schools) is currently under debate, but still has 2 options, one of which will likely pass. This article passes Option 1 ("High schools/secondary schools (all jurisdictions) are considered inherently notable."), but Option 2 still does not allow for deletion ("A school article that fails to establish notability will not be deleted, if the school can be confirmed to exist. It would be simply redirected to the appropriate article for the relevant school district, and could be later expanded back out into it's own article again when sources should become available."). Given that neither option has been passed, I suggest going with the latter, as this school is certainly not yet inherently notable. Given that one of the two options appears to be getting passed, deleting does not seem to be on the menu. Redirect where best. --EnhancedDownloadBird ^(Upload) - 04:56, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment I had had similar thoughts and indeed changing it to a redirect to keep the history in case of such a policy passing may be the most prudent course of action. As things stand now, delete seems most in keeping with policy. JJL (talk) 15:35, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete unless serious sources demonstrating notability are found. Isn't the new policy to merge/redirect to the district/town first, and only resort to AfD if reverted? AnteaterZot (talk) 05:21, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment Wasn't certain if that was the policy or not, but from now on I have no problem trying that. Cheers, CP 19:19, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Regardless of any policy on notability, finding reliable sources is almost entirely impossible and hence the article is incapable of meeting policy norms. Orderinchaos 10:09, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Unremarkable school, like most of the other hundreds of thousands around the world. WWGB (talk) 12:43, 16 December 2007 (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.