Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Delightsome Land School

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 no consensus. Despite the discussion having been open three weeks and relisted twice, no consensus for any action, administrative or otherwise, taking place on this article has been established. (non-admin closure) — fortunavelut luna 13:57, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delightsome Land School[edit]

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

promo piece for a non notable school with unverifiable sources; A search throws up nothing of note except for routine stuff directories and social media. Fails WP:GNG and WP:ORG Domdeparis (talk) 17:07, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. FITINDIA 17:14, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. FITINDIA 17:14, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, So Why 10:46, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't want to participate in this AFD but since no one is !voting I decided to give it a shot. A few weeks ago, I would have given this article a keep vote per WP:SCHOOLOUTCOME since there seem to be some routine coverage which is unusual for an average Nigerian primary school. But with the RFC on WP:SCHOOLOUTCOME, I'm not sure I know the standard for keeping Nigerian schools anymore. However, with notable celebrities being involved with the school, its proprietor base commenting on national issues, and some other impressive mentions online. I can't vote for its deletion. 1 2 Darreg (talk) 19:52, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:29, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep: there are probably sources about it that aren't very searchable in english, and Darreg gives some good arguments that make me think that it is probably better for the wiki to keep this article rather than deleting it. — Insert CleverPhrase Here 09:51, 16 July 2017 (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.