Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denton Technology 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 Delete -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:26, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Denton Technology School[edit]

Delete NN school. No relevant GHITS found Mayalld (talk) 16:46, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Can't find any references to this school existing. Nothing on edubase, etc. Article claims it's only existed since Sept, but surely there would be some web coverage of it somewhere, esp in the Tameside local press. Lugnuts (talk) 18:09, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weal keep - This is a high school. The consensus that these are notable. As it has only just started its second term, it is not surprising there are few sources on it yet. The article is a stub and tapped as such. I would have hoped that the article would mention what schools it replaced. Peterkingiron (talk) 23:38, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ Although I think it shouldnt be, conesensus is that high schools are notable RogueNinja_talk 23:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There may be a consensus that high schools are presumed notable, but that presumption is grounded in the idea that it will always be possible to find reliable sources for any high school. Surely, in cases where no reliable sources can be found, the presumption falls over. Mayalld (talk) 22:01, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Based on info from User:Phil Bridger I would like to change my vote to Delete RogueNinja_talk 12:34, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, unless someone can verify that it exists. It's not on the local council's list of state schools [1], and the Independent Schools' Council, which represents nearly all independent schools in the UK, doesn't know about it [2]. Phil Bridger (talk) 12:09, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per my standards, specifically it has not been open at least 2 years, so that it can be verified and judged on its own merits. Bearian (talk) 18:25, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I agree with deletion, but what have your standards got to do with it? Wikipedia's standards (in this case WP:V), are what matter. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:10, 25 January 2008 (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.