Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denbury Primary 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 merge to Denbury. Daniel (talk) 01:12, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Denbury Primary 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)

Potentially fails WP:NORG here; in particular, WP:ORGDEPTH. I found a passing BBC mention, the Teignmouth Post had a story about new starters and then the school appears in a list of schools in Devon Live.

No coverage outside of Ofsted and you need more than one source to pass NORG. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:27, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:27, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:27, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:27, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Denbury per WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES, most primary schools don't need separate articles. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:31, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Would you recommend trimming it down to one or two sentences? I can't see that there is a whole lot of info about this school and most of the contents of the article seem to be OR. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:04, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I agree much content doesn't need moving perhaps just the location and very basic info. Crouch, Swale (talk) 08:23, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, selectively with Denbury. The only thing I would merge would be a single line description, and 1 or 2 lines about the BBC thing, which is cited. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:36, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Denbury: per WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES, 1 or 2 liner is sufficient CommanderWaterford (talk) 09:51, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, I have sorted the structure, refs and infobox so this is easier to examine and consider. Instinct said 'merge' but it deserves a hearing first. It is of interest architecturally as a typical 1870s school building, it is interesting as an example of a school suffering from rural isolation and lack of funding, one that no academy chain would touch. There is a DYK hook that regional TV had used it when child wrote to PM. We have the GIAS and Ofsted references so it could be expanded. At the moment, nothing has be written about curriculum- KS2 language etc, work needed there. Overall merge to Denbury which in itself is very unloved so work is needed there. The lead editor says he is young and enthusiastic so please try to support and retain him throughout the process.ClemRutter (talk) 10:00, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge whatever is worth merging like other people have already suggested. Since I'm not sure what's saving here. The article is horribly referenced, written like a trivial add copy advert (no offense to meant to the person who wrote it though), and I'm not sure how that can change without sources that clearly don't exist materializing and I don't see that happening. --Adamant1 (talk) 06:35, 31 March 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.