Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Joseph Boys Junior Lyceum (Malta)

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. Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 20:43, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

St. Joseph Boys Junior Lyceum (Malta)[edit]

Unnoteworthy school, violation of WP:V, with no sources to prove notability. Google displays just 40 hits, some of them just lists of schools. ~ ► Wykebjs ◄ (userpage | talk) 23:20, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete NN --rogerd 12:02, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure. The article seems to imply, but does not explicitly state, that this was the first junior lyceum in Malta. If this is so, the school is notable and the article should be retained and improved. Otherwise, I'm inclined to say Delete. WMMartin 13:46, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Nishkid 64 20:31, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep - needs to be verified per WP:V, but I'd say it's notable per current policy; since the failure of WP:SCHOOL there's been no real policy on schools, and many non-noteworthy schools seem to have their own articles. At the moment it seems that schools are treated as inherently notable. Walton monarchist89 20:39, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL Addhoc 10:50, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - the above searches turn up nothing and even using the much derided google hits method only produces 19 unique hits, including this article and mirrors. Addhoc 10:54, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Schools are not inherently noteworthy and the rules of WP:V apply to all articles. If we can't get any reliable & independent sources then we must delete the article. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 18:03, 7 February 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.