Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gymnázium Třebíč

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:30, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Gymnázium Třebíč

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not pass notability criteria per WP:NSCHOOL. FromCzech (talk) 12:11, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. FromCzech (talk) 12:11, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Czech Republic. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:21, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep the article on cswiki cs:Gymnázium Třebíč is in much better shape than this one. A lot of the actual text (outside the long list of alumni) seems to come mainly from one source, but there is probably just about enough there to satisfy GNG. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 09:51, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The importance of the school does not go beyond the boundaries of the district. The sources on cswiki (outside the list of alumni) consist of local media, local history books and a bachelor work. It is not even among the largest high schools in the region. I can't imagine that content on cswiki such as parts of the history, student activities, list of directors, or construction modifications of the school building would have a place here. FromCzech (talk) 11:00, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 12:41, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Plenty of content and sourcing on the Czech Wikipedia page. Easily meets WP:GNG. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:18, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Does that mean that every Czech gymnasium should have a page on enwiki? Because all of these schools can have this generic content and support by local media. Every school has a history (some longer, some shorter); each teaches some subjects, each had list of past directors, each has some activities for students, each has some important alumni (according to the length of history and the centrality of the town where it is located). It does not meet the first criterium of WP:GNG. FromCzech (talk) 10:17, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Simple answer. Yes. If it has sufficient sourcing. Just like almost all British and American secondary schools do. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:20, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article does not show any more notability then any run-of-the-mill school. Not enough to warrant an article. The Banner talk 20:14, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 19:07, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:14, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the sourcing at cs:wiki page suggests it is a notable school. Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 15:32, 6 February 2023 (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.