Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daegwang Elementary School

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 23:45, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Daegwang Elementary School[edit]

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

fails WP:ORG. elementary schoools have no inherent notability. this one looks like WP:SCHOOLCRUFT. it was marked for notability and being uncited in June 2013. the Korean version of this article is poorly sourced too. LEt's see if the usual suspect turns up to this AfD. LibStar (talk) 02:11, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This article is intended to provide information about this elementary school in Korea. It could be improved with more content and additional sources. Bmbaker88 (talk) 02:30, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment All articles are to provide information about their subjects; that's neither here nor there. Are there independent sources to show that it meets notability requirements? LadyofShalott 02:58, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

sounds like a WP:ITSNOTABLE. LibStar (talk) 03:30, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Elementary schools have no inherent notability as per WP:NSCHOOL. Since this issue comes up repeatedly as far as AfDs, Wikipedia should emphasize in WP:NSCHOOL that schools have no inherent notability because the issue of elementary/High school notability is a reoccurring source of AfDs. Wikipedia should emphasize the "no inherent notability" criteria for schools or change the rules on school notability and make schools with a certain enrollment size or other obvious means of demarcation have automatic notability. Knox490 (talk) 03:28, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete lacks the independent reliable coverage needed to satisfy both WP:ORG and WP:GNG. Gab4gab (talk) 15:34, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Per Knox490. XboxGamer22408^{talk to me} 18:08, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - On it's own it doesn't meet established guidelines for WP:ORGSIG notability. There exists, however, some precedent for small schools to be referenced in articles about larger and more notable organizations in which they are a part of. For example, my elementary school does not have an article, but the school district does and it is listed there. I would suggest you explore that route if you feel that this school needs to be referenced in some manner, but it doesn't warrant it's own article. Good luck. unak¹⁹⁷⁸ 19:03, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. LadyofShalott 21:03, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Korea-related deletion discussions. LadyofShalott 21:05, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. LadyofShalott 21:06, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- Conventionally we accept most secondary schools as notable, but Primary (and below) as NN, though they may be merged/redirected in Education in <place, school board, local authority>. Peterkingiron (talk) 11:49, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
delete nn per se. Dloh cierekim 14:36, 5 May 2017 (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.