Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saint Anthony's 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 redirect to List of primary schools in Singapore. Or elsewhere as subsequent consensus may determine. Sandstein 13:44, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Saint Anthony's Primary School[edit]

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

Non notable primary school. The existence of this school is supported by sources but none that might support any claims that this school is in any way out of the ordinary, important , or significant per WP:GNG and WP:ORG. Our normal practice as documented in WP:OUTCOMES and supported by policy is to redirect such school articles. As the creator is known for reverting redirects of Singapore schools, the community is asked to confirm that 'redirect' is the appropriate status for this article. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:14, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect, possible targets include La Sallian educational institutions#Singapore and Bukit Batok New Town#Education. I'm not sure which target precedent favors, and I don't have a personal preference. If WP:X or Y is an issue, then I would prefer to pick a redirect target but if that would be controversial, then I will not object to delete. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 02:40, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter what the redirect target is as long as the school is mentioned. All primary schools in Singapore are on List of primary schools in Singapore so that is a good default target. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:33, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. -- 1Wiki8Q5G7FviTHBac3dx8HhdNYwDVstR (talk) 08:48, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. -- 1Wiki8Q5G7FviTHBac3dx8HhdNYwDVstR (talk) 08:48, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of primary schools in Singapore per above. Does not appear to have individual notability, but it is a possible search term. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 11:53, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Change to keep per the sources found below. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 15:56, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of primary schools in Singapore, or appropriate locality article. This is how we have handled lower schools in hundreds of AfDs, this one should be treated the same. Jacona (talk) 02:20, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and Comment I believe this article is a victim of poor referencing, rather than notability. It is a school with over 100 years of history, no mean feat considering that Singapore only gained independence merely 50 years ago (1965). Even its original school building has been gazetted by the Urban Redevelopment Authority as a conservation building (source). For editors who love to cite guidelines, particularly WP:ORG, these archival newspaper articles [1], [2] and [3] demonstrate sustained (over 100 years) and substantial coverage of the subject. Lastly, this website by Singapore's National Library Board also talks about this organisation.--Lionratz (t<alk) 16:00, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Lionratz:The references you mention are on web sites that are currently down for me and for others as well (see [4] and [5]). It is possible that these domains are not available to people in my country, or it is possible that they are experiencing temporary problems. Archive.org was no help. If the links ARE visible to you, consider adding them to archive.org or another repository then linking the archived versions here. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 17:27, 12 September 2015 (UTC) The web sites are now back up. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:42, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, based on the new references above, though the emphasis of the article should reflect the historic nature of the school rather than the long list of non-notable extra-curricular activities which needs severe editing. Derek Andrews (talk) 14:32, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to appropriate article. From other AFD's we've established we should delete primary school articles. MrWooHoo (talk) 02:50, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:43, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: @MrWooHoo:'s comment of 02:50, 17 September 2015 (UTC): I think past practice is that elementary and junior high schools are not presumed to be notable in the same way almost all accredited, diploma-granting high schools are. However, like any other organization, they may be notable on a case-by-case basis if they satisfy WP:GNG, WP:CORP, or some other criteria. In other words, they aren't de facto disqualified simply because they happen to be an elementary school. When I see a school (not a school building) that his historical (very old for its country), a school that meets in a historical building, a school that is "very unique" in some way (say, it hosts a world-renowned children's music program), a school with a Blue Ribbon Schools or similar award, a school with International Baccalaureate- or similar-programs, or a school which formerly included a diploma-granting high school which ceased operation (surprisingly common among US Roman Catholic schools), I give a long pause before going into "automatic redirect/automatic !vote 'redirect'" mode. Ditto schools that are famous for WP:ONEEVENT where the event clearly meets WP:N but it does not have its own article and where the school article discusses the event in depth (in those cases a split or move may be warranted, but not deletion). That's not to say I won't come down on the side of redirect/delete, but I will give it significant thought. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:13, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as per the millions upon millions of Primary schools that have been sent here - Consensus is to redirect them all and always will be, As an aside the creator deserves blocking for reverting! (Well if it's the same person anyway). –Davey2010^Talk 22:45, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As a Singaporean historian, I second the historic value. Deletion destroys knowledge. Bpc.sg (talk) 03:27, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per longstanding consensus that all but the most exceptional primary schools are presumed non-notable. No evidence that this is anything but. Carrite (talk) 22:07, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect for others. Rainbow unicorn (talk) 00:48, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as per above editors. Nothing to show stand-alone notability for its own article. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:19, 25 September 2015 (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.