Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kawthekar High 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 keep. Owen× ☎ 22:27, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kawthekar High School

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

Very little content and no reliable sources, and very few ghits to indicate notability. » Swpb^{τ • ¢} 20:45, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 20:18, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 20:18, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - the arguments as to why we keep high school articles are given in the essay WP:NHS. Ghits are a very poor measure of the notability of Indian schools as most have very little in the way of Internet presence. To avoid systemic bias we should await a local search for sources from regional newspapers and libraries and the like. Lack of content is also not a valid deletion reason; that's the way of stubs; they start small and grow over the years and is how Wikipedia develops articles.

In my view, Jimmy Wales opinion from November 2003 is still valid:

"...Put another way, if someone wants to write an article about their high school, we should relax and accommodate them, even if we wish they wouldn't do it. And that's true *even if* we should react differently if someone comes in and starts mass-adding articles on every high school in the world. ..."Partial solution to rampant deletionism, Wikimedia, November 7, 2003.

TerriersFan (talk) 20:34, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: per TerriersFan, in accordance with every high school AfD since almost ever.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 01:55, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per TerriersFan, who clearly outlines for us once again the standard practice. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:19, 11 May 2011 (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.