Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Srinivasa Ramanjuan Concept School

Add links
Source: 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 no consensus. There remains no consensus regarding secondary schools that meet verification. There remains no clarity from this discussion, either. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 04:58, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Srinivasa Ramanjuan Concept School

Srinivasa Ramanjuan Concept School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced (now that Facebook "reference" has been removed), no evidence of notability. PamD 13:30, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And which of those bare-URL sources satisfies the notability requirements of WP:ORG? Checking a couple I've found job adverts and very routine directory listings. PamD 18:55, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The first two sources in the current version of the article appear to be user-editable, and therefore not reliable. The other two aren't great either, are they? Cordless Larry (talk) 18:44, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 14:46, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 14:46, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The initial version made me believe that the article was created for promotional purposes. It was also titled as "Srhshnk.com", which i moved to the current title. The first version, and the move can be seen here: special:diff/833979798. The current version is the result of DESiegel, and my edits. All the citations are directories, and/or listings. Fails general notability guidelines, as no mention in reliable sources. —usernamekiran(talk) 12:52, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Article has sources. Every secondary school school should be included, so biographies can show education roots. --Dthomsen8 (talk) 13:00, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete While there are sources they don't provide significant coverage that is independent. Could be redirected to Hanamkonda if the school was mentioned in that article. Gab4gab (talk) 13:29, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Sourced article on accredited secondary school. No good reason to delete. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:06, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Accredited English medium secondary school. The usual practice as evidenced by literally 1,000s of AfD closures, is to keep such schools and not create backlogs at AfD with them. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:47, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • There was that RfC, link provided below by PamD. The thousands of AfS's were in the past. We should use our own logic, and shouldnt be part of headless herd. —usernamekiran(talk) 16:42, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete-Zero evidence of notability.NOTDIRECTORY.~ Winged BladesGodric 15:46, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 16:05, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as failing WP:GNG, with not enough source material to make an article viable. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:49, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep I agree with Kudpung กุดผึ้ง, who says Accredited English medium secondary school. The usual practice as evidenced by literally 1,000s of AfD closures, is to keep such schools and not create backlogs at AfD with them. Best said for every accredited English language school. --Dthomsen8 (talk) 19:38, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: In the 2017 RfC on secondary school notability I !voted in favour of keeping articles on all secondary schools which verifiably existed. But the outcome of the RfC went the other way. If that discussion means anything, then a school which verifiably exists but has no sources apart from routine listings does not pass as notable. Or why did we all spend so much time deliberating? PamD 07:21, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Exemplo347 (talk) 08:34, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: No longer an orphan. Added two references.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 12:24, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Justdial.com appears to be (yet another) user-editable listings website, and so not a reliable source. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:31, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment -- The school is named for Srinivasa Ramanujan, and the reference is to that Indian mathematician being recognized at another Indian secondary school. If that reference is unacceptable to you, I will find references directly to him. My point was that mathematician is revered at several Indian secondary schools, and that inline reference documents that fact. Can I reverse the edit? (I never editwar!)--Dthomsen8 (talk) 15:26, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I wonder if a better reference can be found or the article could be reworded? The source gives one example, which doesn't really support the claim in the article that he is recognised at many schools. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:12, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
We have the present article named for Srinivasa Ramanujan, and we have another reference where the school celebrates him, and I have provided three more references about him.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 22:50, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Dthomsen8 and Cordless Larry: This article is about the school, not about the mathematician. Dthomsen8, if you want to add content that the mathematician is revered at many schools, then it should go in his article. An organisation doesnt become notable because it is named after some notable entity. —usernamekiran(talk) 00:32, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Wikipedia practice. In practice, Wikipedia does not delete articles about schools, irrespective of their notability. (E.g. see here.) Keeping all the articles about schools in, for example, the United States, and deleting articles about schools in other countries, such as, for example, this one, would be inconsistent practice. -The Gnome (talk) 05:36, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Hanamkonda#Education as it can be described in a sentence (which it already has) in that section. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:32, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete does not meet WP:GNG. Secondary schools are not exempt, per WP:Village pump (policy)/Archive 133#RfC on secondary school notability§1. Many of the keep arguments here are WP:INHERITED. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:41, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note for closer: NAC - please do not relist this again. Let an admin decide what to do. There is enough here for a close depending on the strength of the comments - not necessarily numerical votes, and in any appropriate cases, 'no consensus' is also a valid AfD close. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk)
  • Keep article is sourced. Also I would like to make a point here regarding an argument above. The language medium a school teaches in is not relevant to it's notability. A school that teaches in English is not more notable than a school that teaches in Telegu for instance.Egaoblai (talk) 15:46, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's sourced by the existence as an entry in the government directory, which could be covered by a listing of schools. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:31, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Move if kept: as pointed out on talk page, the article title is misspelled! PamD 06:10, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @PamD: yup. If not deleted through AfD, I will delete the faulty title, and move it to correct one. —usernamekiran(talk) 06:17, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    What is the correct title?--Dthomsen8 (talk) 14:36, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Seriously? If the one source spells Ramanujan the same way as the mathematician's Wikipedia article does, but the school's article uses "Ramanjuan"... ? PamD 15:50, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This has now been running for exactly 3 weeks and it's getting ridiculous for such an insignificant article. Can we now have a close on it one way or another?Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:54, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • CommentI agree with Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk). We should have a decision, even if it is Disagree.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 14:36, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Event though the subject of the article lacks source-supported independent notability, we better close this down without more delays and close it with a KEEP decision. Wikipedia is not deleting articles about schools, irrespective of the schools' notability. That is the established practice. Get it over with. And make sure it doesn't come up for AfD again. -The Gnome (talk) 16:42, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That was the practice, but a number of school articles have been deleted lately. I'm not sure why closing this AfD is so urgent, either. Sure, we don't want it to drag on forever, but it's not a bad thing to get as wide an input as possible when consensus is in flux, as it is with secondary schools. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:02, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not aware of the practice changing. Do you happen to have any examples of that? -The Gnome (talk) 17:47, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, The Gnome. Here are three examples: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Sheffield Private School, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Quaid School and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ace School System (2nd nomination). Cordless Larry (talk) 17:56, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Cordless Larry. But, then, I have to ask: Where were you in this dicussion? And where were Sandstein and Joe Roe, for that matter? :-) The Gnome (talk) 18:03, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't know about it, The Gnome. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:34, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note There's no reason to urgently close this, and a non-admin CAN close it or relist it. Why try to railroad it through? Jeez. Exemplo347 (talk) 19:52, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note to the person who closes this AfD: There was a lengthy RfC, which resulted in "Secondary schools are not presumed to be notable simply because they exist." They should also take a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Sheffield Private School. —usernamekiran(talk) 00:05, 20 May 2018 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Srinivasa_Ramanjuan_Concept_School&oldid=842090886"