Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mount Carmel Convent Anglo-Indian Girls High School

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 keep. Eddie891 Talk Work 12:45, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mount Carmel Convent Anglo-Indian Girls High School[edit]

Mount Carmel Convent Anglo-Indian Girls High School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:ORG. No reliable sources apart from directory links found. YogeshWarahTalk 05:24, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. YogeshWarahTalk 05:24, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. YogeshWarahTalk 05:24, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. YogeshWarahTalk 05:24, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. YogeshWarahTalk 05:24, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep A respectable, substantial and historic school covered in a variety of sources including The Way We Were: Anglo-Indian Chronicles and 1600-1947, Anglo-Indian Legacy. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:38, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Andrew, Do you have any reliable source to prove the notability? I've already done WP:Before before nominating the article. YogeshWarahTalk 12:17, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yogeshwarah, This is no particular criticism of you, because this is something I see with many deletion nominations, but I wish people would do more that put the title in quotes and perform a Google web search before claiming to have performed WP:BEFORE. For example the first search I did on seeing this title was this, recognizing that there would be too many hits for "Mount Carmel" and that it has probably given its name to many convents. I then used my favourite encyclopedia to determine that "Quilon" is an alternative name for Kollam and that Tangasseri is a part of that city. Now, that's not enough for me to say that I have looked hard enough for sources to nominate an article for deletion, but it's a start. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:21, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: per nom, fails WP:ORG , no WP:RS at all CommanderWaterford (talk) 12:19, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as per the multiple reliable sources coverage identified by Andrew D in this discussion that show a pass of WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 00:11, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - subject is covered by multiple reliable sources, as Andrew has pointed out. I have added some of those to the article. --Joshua Issac (talk) 02:30, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:SIGCOV. Plenty of sources, not great but acceptable. Bearian (talk) 17:15, 7 April 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.