Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syndal South Primary School
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 keep. John254 16:11, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Syndal South Primary School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
A primary school with no assertion of notability. Since there seem to be no reliable published works about it it fails Wikipedia:Notability Pax:Vobiscum 22:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep In it's new form the article doesn't seem to have any problems with notability. Pax:Vobiscum 18:22, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, non notable school. J Milburn 22:28, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep As modified, article makes explicit claims of notability for its environmental efforts, documented with reliable and verifiable sources, with more to come. Alansohn 03:35, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete nn primary school (per the arguments re notability at the discussion at WP:SCHOOLS), with a chuffed up section detailing its commitment to environmentalism as an attempted stab at notability that, being a primary school, is unavailable to the subject. Eusebeus 22:39, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply Let's get this one straight: The claim of notability is based on multiple, independent reliable and verifiable sources, all of which make support the claims of notability. However, as a primary school it is ineligible for notability!?!? Can you reference which Wikipedia policy this one came out of? Where on earth was this discussed at WP:SCHOOLS? You're really grasping this time. Even the nominator has changed his vote to Keep. Alansohn 23:34, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletions. -- Butseriouslyfolks 06:31, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep' LordHarris 11:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per nom. --Vsion 20:21, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- keep please references show this is notabel for us to have yuckfoo 00:22, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - notability has unquestionably been established. TerriersFan 01:35, 13 May 2007 (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.