Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah Junior School

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sarah Junior School[edit]

Sarah Junior School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

PROD countered. Per WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES, articles about primary schools are only kept if they can be shown to meet WP:NORG. That is not the case here. Indeed, this is an article about a kindergarten. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:59, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, Kenya, and United Kingdom. Skynxnex (talk) 03:43, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep It is also a story about a UK-based charity. I added a few references. Hopefully just enough to save this story.Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 04:05, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Ruud Buitelaar.Tamsier (talk) 03:06, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - although happy to consider a suitable redirect. I'm sorry but there is just not enough information about this school, as is the case of the vast majority of junior schools. Yes, this one is a charitable venture. Lots of them are. There are now four sources on the page. I analyse these below (with the first SHOFCO source being the only one that was there prior to AfD). On my analysis we do not have anything that meets WP:SIRS. There is almost nothing we can actually say about this school in an article. Source analysis:
Created with templates {{ORGCRIT assess table}} and {{ORGCRIT assess}}
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor.
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Secondary? Overall value toward ORGCRIT
SHOFCO [1] Yes SHOFCO is Shining Hope for Communities, US based, I think it is a charity, and with a focus on Kibera. Yes SHOFCO appears legitimate. I have not investigated too hard on that score because this source fails on SIGCOV No The link is dead, but it is dated April 2009, and archive.org has a copy of the article [2]. There is no mention of this school at all in the article. As there is no mention of the school, this is moot.
Charity Commission [3] Yes Yes No An overview of the charity, Maisha Tust. Nothing about th school. The charity is small too. No This is a primary source.
Optima [4] Yes Yes Fitzwilliam College Newsletter with news of an alumna, the school's founder. No There is a single paragraph telling us that Sarah Shucksmith, a former Geography student, founded this school in her gap year, and they are building a new school building. It's creditable, but it's not notable. – It is reporting and this is primary per WP:PRIMARYNEWS. However, as I know people will want to claim otherwise, and SIGCOV is not met anyway, I'll leave that as undetermined. It does not change anything.
Rus Newton [5] No This is a WP:SPS - a blog is a self published source – I have no reason to say the writer is unreliable, but this is still self published. Yes To be honest, this would be well short of CORPDEPTH, but I would give ground to this being a charitable work, not a corporation. There is a little information here from which a page could be written, but it really isn't much. A lot more is needed, but I'll give it a yes on this one. Yes y

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:41, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]