Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bait-Ul-Ilm School (2nd nomination)

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. T. Canens (talk) 03:12, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bait-Ul-Ilm School[edit]

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

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

Does not meet WP:NSCHOOL as there is no significant coverage of it in reliable multiple sources. The previous AfD used the "all high schools are notable" which is not the case since 2017 now per the RFC at [1]. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 10:02, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:45, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:45, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:46, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The government references are enough to establish notability. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:01, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Did you manage to access archive versions of those sources, Eastmain? The links are currently dead. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:58, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Scott Burley (talk) 10:16, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Eastmain. Mosaicberry (talk • contribs) 11:05, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a private business lacking significant coverage in independent sources. The school's website isn't active, so it may well have closed down, but due to the lack of coverage it's hard to know. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:57, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To expand on the above, the five sources cited in the current version of the article are two pages on the school's own website (not functioning), some sort of directory site, and two pages on the website of the Revenue Division of the Government of Pakistan, which presumably contained financial details about the school, but which are dead links. A search for further sources hasn't revealed anything reliable. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:12, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 15:52, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - non-notable school - the article was created by the school itself, so WP:COI - the government listings only show that the school exists and merely existing is not enough to establish notability - does not meet WP:GNG, WP:NSCHOOL or WP:NGO, which states, "Organizations whose activities are local in scope (e.g., a school or club) can be considered notable if there is substantial verifiable evidence of coverage by reliable independent sources outside the organization's local area." - Epinoia (talk) 00:29, 12 May 2019 (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.