Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/D.A.V. Public School, Balasore

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. ✗plicit 23:52, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

D.A.V. Public School, Balasore[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)

Non-notable school. Fails WP:NSCHOOL, WP:SIGCOV and WP:ORG. Peter Ormond 💬 22:13, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:14, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:14, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:14, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep on the grounds that there has been insufficient effort made to find sources. The RFC that amended the assumed notability of schools noted that "...Because extant secondary schools often have reliable sources that are concentrated in print and/or local media, a deeper search than normal is needed to attempt to find these sources. At minimum, this search should include some local print media" This particular nominator has been tagging schools articles for deletion at a rate of one every two minutes and that does not leave any time for any sort of search at all, let alone in local print sources which may only be available in the relevant country. The RFC also noted that "Editors are asked to refrain from making indiscriminate or excessive nominations. " I do not in any way doubt the sincerity of the nominator, who may be unaware of the RFC, and I share with them a real concern about the notability of many of the nominations, but I do think a little more investigation and a little less pace would help direct the effort in a more targeted and helpful way. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 22:25, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The RfC notes should not shall. AfD discussions can be relisted up to three times (given the circumstances), that's up to 4 weeks of time to at least provide some thought to these discussions. Additionally, the most important item from the RfC is WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. You can make either argument about how there is no deadline to delete or postpone discussion about whether it should be kept or not. There are sources or no sources. That will not change a month from now. To make it clear, this is perhaps the correct speed to take them. – The Grid (talk) 20:39, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 22:24, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It looks like the nominator has AfD schools that have been soft deleted in the past. Pinging Velella just to let them know it seems this was a good faith nomination. Out of the 56 discussions they submitted on the 12th, 16 are still open, 1 closed as keep, and the rest were deleted. – The Grid (talk) 14:36, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ping. I am content with deletion under those circumstances. I was concerned that proper care should be taken before mass deleting schools. If these were unsourced and previously soft deleted, I have no objection to a delete Velella ^{Velella Talk}

Delete No significant coverage found, mainly listings and social media. The Banner talk 11:38, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This article clearly fails the notability guidelines. I couldn't even find trivial information about it. Let alone anything significant enough for it to be notable. --Adamant1 (talk) 14:34, 26 December 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.