Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Woodway Park School and Community College

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. Yamamoto Ichiro 会話 19:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Woodway Park School and Community College[edit]

No claim to notability, no secondary sources. Even though WP:SCHOOL is only a proposal, it does not match those criteria either. Random Fixer Of Things (talk) 12:39, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep~~Comment~~. Woodbay passes proposed WP:SCHOOL#Primary criteria #2. An (11-18) is a secondary school (7-12). The secondary source provided is Ofsted (the government) summary with links to the full 2007 inspection report. Passes WP:V as a stub. • Gene93k (talk) 13:02, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure that it does as the criteria is:

"High schools/secondary schools are regarded as notable unless encyclopaedic material is not available."

Although the term is not defined, I don't see any "encyclopaedic material" provided. The information provided so far could be provided for every single secondary school in England, and I don't think that is what WP:SCHOOL intends. No doubt it passes WP:V, the issue here is WP:N. I would also consider the Ofsted report to be a primary source rather than a secondary source, but it depends on what you would consider the primary source to be in this case. Random Fixer Of Things (talk) 13:23, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Available" implies available for editors to look up. Google and Google News searches for Woodway Park School show substantial WP:RS coverage over time, plenty to expand the stub and satisfy general notability guidelines. Comment changed to keep above. Deletion should be based on whether the article can be expanded or fixed, not just the state it is in. • Gene93k (talk) 13:56, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: It is notable being well known locally, and more widely because it is going to be converted to an Academy. I have added more references from reliable sources. Snowman (talk) 18:06, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Being "well known" locally means nothing, all school are reasonably well known locally (plus it is original research, unless you can find a source for it being well known). The only significant source provided seems to be the BBC link, except that this is just standard statistics, which the BBC publishes for all school. I have yet to see any source provide anything that indicates notability above every other secondary school, and we do not include every secondary school. We need somebodyt to add something that makes this school distinctive compared to the average secondary school. Random Fixer Of Things (talk) 19:28, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The page is well referenced, and reliable sources are used. It is suitable according to WP:SCHOOL. Snowman (talk) 19:55, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If it is, which notability criteria does it meet? Random Fixer Of Things (talk) 20:13, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is notable according to primary criteria 1 and 2. Snowman (talk) 20:33, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, because it has not 1) had significant coverage in secondary sources (if it has please provide them) and 2) there is no indication of encyclopadic material (if there is please provide it). The OFSTED report does not count towards either of them, neither does the listing on the BBC (all schools have both of those). Random Fixer Of Things (talk) 22:01, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't forget that WP:SCHOOL is only a proposed guideline so for now, as WP:SCHOOL itself acknowledges:

"every school AfD has to be argued from first principles against WP:N." Random Fixer Of Things (talk) 22:19, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think it's changed--for many weeks, every high school article that comes here has been kept, unless there is something wrong with it other than notability. I think we now do have a consensus, and we can skip the nonsense of arguing them from scratch. It does not have to be more notable than other secondary schools, and more than universities have to be more notable than other universities. DGG (talk) 22:59, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is not consensus that is just you coming to a conclusion from some recent discussions. Consensus on WP:SCHOOL will be seen at WP:SCHOOL where the actual debate is, not derived from a few discussions, which may well have been about notable schools. Just because other articles have been kept, does not mean that all should. Random Fixer Of Things (talk) 00:24, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non notable. WP:SCHOOL is only a proposal, and it's claim that all high schools are automatically notable is nuts. --Nick Dowling (talk) 04:23, 13 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.