Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zion Christian Academy

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 delete. Noone has refuted that the coverage is simply routine. Courcelles (talk) 13:28, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Zion Christian Academy[edit]

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

Zion Christian Academy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Created by a WP:SPA,WP:COI account in 2009, 14 years later this article still has only one reference, and that is a now deleted page on the school's website. The school does exist, but there is no evidence that it is in any way notable. Jacona (talk) 12:04, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Salvio giuliano 18:27, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Closing for spring break and graduating students is routine coverage. Rest is about as trivial. Oaktree b (talk) 14:54, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The source that discusses closing for spring break provides significant coverage about the subject. It says that Zion Christian Academy was founded in 1979, has 480 students, is a pre-kindergarten to grade 12 school, has students who "test in the top 24 percent nationwide", and discusses the test scores of the students on the ACT. Cunard (talk) 19:46, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So beyond basic facts, it still isn't notable. Oaktree b (talk) 23:47, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as per the multiple reliable sources identified above that show a pass of WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 00:24, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: per nom. Sources in artcle, above and BEFORE are WP:ROUTINE, PRIMARY, PROMO. This is a completely normal school, not an encyclopedic topic.  // Timothy :: talk  12:11, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: While there are policy driven rationales for keeping the article, there are also policy driven rationales for deletion. Ultimately what it will come down to, and what consensus needs to be reached on, is whether or not the subject meets WP:NOTABILITY criteria. Some things to take into account include both the amount and range of coverage the subject receives by WP:RS. The quality of sources is also important, with only reliable secondary sources providing WP:SIGCOV eligible to demonstrate WP:NOTABILITY. Demonstrating that the subject either does or does not satisfy WP:GNG will also be of tantamount importance as the discussion turns towards consensus. Essentially, demonstration of notability will support keeping the article, whereas failing to demonstrate notability should result in deletion. Discussion needs to focus on whether or not the subject satisfies notability and WP:SIGCOV criteria, as sufficient SIGCOV would effectively demonstrate notability - which, if the case, would not warrant deletion insert the relevant policies. On the other hand, if it is decided that existing subject coverage is WP:ROUTINE and fails SIGCOV, there would certainly be a strong case for deletion. Therefore, assessing subject notability and coming to an agreement on the quality of sources will be of utmost importance in arriving at a policy-based consensus in regards to the outcome of this discussion. While I currently see a consensus developing to keep, the deletion arguments also have basis in policy and should be taken into account by the closer. The veracity of the existing sources needs careful scrutiny. Coverage amounting to WP:TRIVIAL or WP:ROUTINE would fall short of WP:SIGCOV and be grounds for deletion. Keeping would require that SIGCOV is established to demonstrate notability according to WP:GNG among other relevant guidelines. Shawn Teller (he/her) (talk) 17:19, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 10:51, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete a school closing for spring break, playing sports and graduating students is very routine, I'm not sure why we think these can be used to prove notability. My kids school also does these things. Trivial coverage that doesn't equal GNG. The building is not a listed heritage building. What's left is largely promo for a non-notable, run of the mill school. Oaktree b (talk) 14:56, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete it’s a fee-paying private school so has to meet NCORP, but all we have is coverage from a local newspaper, which any school would have. Mccapra (talk) 15:52, 2 April 2023 (UTC) striking !vote following correction by Cunard, but I still don’t think it’s notable. Mccapra (talk) 11:32, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Zion Christian Academy is a non-profit educational institution. According to https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/452842036, it is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization. From Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Schools, "All universities, colleges and schools, including high schools, middle schools, primary (elementary) schools, and schools that only provide a support to mainstream education must either satisfy the notability guidelines for organizations, the general notability guideline, or both. For-profit educational organizations and institutions are considered commercial organizations and must satisfy those criteria."

    As Zion Christian Academy is not a for-profit educational institution, it does not need to meet WP:NCORP even though it is "a fee-paying private school". Editors argue that Zion Christian Academy is "a completely normal school" and a "run of the mill school". This is true. Per the notability guideline for schools, it is sufficient for Zion Christian Academy as a non-profit educational institution to be a "completely normal school" and still meet Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline. The general notability guideline allows sources about a school's sports activities, graduations, art performances, and school news to be used to establish notability. In its definition of "significant coverage", the general notability guideline says a source qualifies when it "addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content" and "significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material". The sources I provided meet this requirement.

    It is fine for a school to have "coverage from a local newspaper" be used to establish notability. In this case, Zion Christian Academy received coverage beyond local sources. It was covered in The Tennessean, a regional newspaper that has a circulation area of 39 counties in Middle Tennessee and eight counties in southern Kentucky. The Tennessean is based in Nashville, Tennessee, while Zion Christian Academy is based in Columbia, Tennessee. This is a distance of 46 miles (74 km), which means Zion Christian Academy has received non-local coverage.

    Cunard (talk) 19:46, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Sufficient regional coverage that meets NCORP/GNG. Kcmastrpc (talk) 01:26, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete not notable. Andre🚐 19:21, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero Parlez Moi 11:33, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:ORG. Per WP:CORPDEPTH we would need to see significant coverage of Zion Christian Academy as a school/institution (it's history, it's academic programs, it's extracurricular offerings, it's mission, etc.) None of the sources above provide any in-depth overall coverage of the organization as as a school. The WP:REFBOMBING of sources consist mainly of routine school announcements which are essentially press releases to the media, routine coverage of school sporting events and graduation, and other isolated events that lack any broader big picture coverage. etc. Without any sources covering the school in a larger picture, I am not seeing a strong indicator of notability under GNG.4meter4 (talk) 16:58, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The sources listed above show this is an average, normal, unnotable school. It is entirely ROUTINE local coverage the kind any school would receive.  // Timothy :: talk  03:27, 17 April 2023 (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/Zion_Christian_Academy&oldid=1150486447"