Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lourdes Public School and Junior College

Add links
From 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 speedy keep under criterion 4, and there are enough arguments from banned editors here to make a consensus difficult if not impossible not to determine. There is no prejudice against speedy renomination if an editor in good standing wishes to renominate. Seraphimblade Talk to me 06:46, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lourdes Public School and Junior College, Kottayam[edit]

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

Lourdes Public School and Junior College, Kottayam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not pass criteria set forward by WP:NSCHOOL. Not even a good reference. Bornfromashes (talk) 04:16, 18 February 2021 striking blocked sockpuppet, Atlantic306 (talk) 00:23, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 05:31, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 05:31, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 05:31, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Lack of significant reliable references to justify the notability of the subject. Timberlack (talk) 05:46, 18 February 2021 (UTC) striking blocked sock/meatpuppet, Atlantic306 (talk) 00:23, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 12:45, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 12:45, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • information Note: Nominator blocked for socking. Blablubbs|talk 14:56, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete not even close to meeting GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:29, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep (1) because the speedy was closed as keep (2) A dearth of citations is not a reason for deletion : we require verifability not that it is verified by references; the excpetion is BLP, which this is not. In India English-medium schools are the gateway to well-paid employment, which might be a factor towards notability, but I take no view on notability. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:09, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete No reliable references to justify the notability of the subject. JaiMahadev (talk) 03:11, 26 February 2021 (UTC) striking another blocked sockpuppet of the original nominator, Atlantic306 (talk) 00:41, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Totally agree with the other delete voters. There's nothing sourcing wise to justify this being notable. The nominator being a sock is unfortunate, but really a separate issue to the purpose of AfDs IMO. So, I see now reason this can't still be evaluated on the articles merits or lack of them. --Adamant1 (talk) 03:28, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:44, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - the organisation does not appear to have ever been subject to significant coverage from independent, reliable, secondary sources. Sources found do not meet WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:ORGIND and ultimately WP:NORG is not met. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 11:06, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request Procedural Close: I agree withthe Delete !votes, but noms by socks should not be considered, doing so only encourages more socking. If an editor feels this is not notable, they should renominate and this close should not be considered.  // Timothy :: talk  16:53, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Timothy makes a good point. I have struck my vote. This was created by a prolific vandal and we should not be encouraging their behaviour. If this school is to be deleted, the discussion should be started by a good faith editor, not someone with a clear COI who has had multiple accounts blocked for promoting a rival school to this one. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 14:49, 6 March 2021 (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/Lourdes_Public_School_and_Junior_College&oldid=1010771427"