Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Albuera Street 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 delete all. --Core desat 05:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Albuera Street Primary School

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

One line article about a school with no evidence of notability provided. While the article may improved in the future, the school is unlikely to be notable Mattinbgn/talk 10:24, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Longhair\talk 10:27, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related pages for similar reasons as above:
 * --Mattinbgn/talk 10:35, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * --Mattinbgn/talk 10:35, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * --Mattinbgn/talk 10:35, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * --Mattinbgn/talk 10:35, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * --Mattinbgn/talk 10:35, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * --Mattinbgn/talk 10:35, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Addition:
 * was tagged speedy delete, merge to this AfD by Chuq (talk) 03:54, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * was tagged speedy then tagged "prod-nn" now included here as part of the same group of articles. --Mattinbgn/talk 13:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete  Very few primary schools are notable enough for their own articles, and these seem to be no exception.   Mr Stephen 10:36, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, these can be recreated if there is anything notable about the schools but there is no information here that needs protecting. Euryalus 10:43, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, these schools do not appear to be notable. Lankiveil 10:48, 16 April 2007 (UTC).
 * Delete, but redirect to name of town - please, as per WP:LOCAL? That's more useful than just a straight delete. JRG 13:04, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - WP:LOCAL is not a policy. --User: (talk • contribs) 13:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete all - While I'm not actually against schools having articles, these clearly are not notable enough to exist outside one line in the parent article, eg Avoca, Tasmania. (I also added Deloraine - same or similar grounds) Orderinchaos 14:14, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment - I created these pages because I thought I was being helpful. There is a page called List of schools in Tasmania with lots of red links for pages to be created so I had a few hours free and decided to pitch in and start creating them. I have no knowledge of any of these places. I would not have bothered if I thought they were going to be deleted. I have very little spare time so it is fustrating to find I have wasted it. I thought 'red links' were links where a page was required? Can anyone suggest how I might contribute in future without haveing all my efforts deleted? Also, it seems to me that if a self-interested private school creates their own page, it stays, whereas state funded school don't seem to be important. Just a thought. MrsPlum 22:50, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Before doing this work it would have been a good idea to discuss it at a talk page I guess - either Talk:List of schools in Tasmania, or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tasmania might have been good places to try. Unfortunately this does happen that when articles are created without finding sources first then what is created is a directory-style stub which does not show that the subject of the article is at all notable. Garrie 23:02, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * First off, thanks for being helpful and trying to resolve redlinks. If more people did this, Wikipedia would be a much better place. Second, the proposed deletion is no reflection on your work, its just that it appears the articles don't meet the notability guidelines for schools. Schools need to have some notable feature(s) other than their existence - for example, interesting architecture, a number of famous alumni, or a record of winning nationally significant competitions. Many schools can meet these criteria, but these current articles don't include that kind of info. Have a look at WP:SCHOOLS for an idea of the kind of information that might justify a school article.Euryalus 02:57, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * P.S. I should have added - WP:SCHOOLS is not official policy, but it is a useful guideline nonetheless. Check out the active links at the top of its page for more current conversations on schools articles. Euryalus 02:57, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * List of schools in Tasmania doesn't appear to show there being any huge variation in the number of articles created between private schools, and public schools? (Percentage wise there may be, but that is because of the sheer volume of primary schools, most of which were added in a red-linked form, by an anon user in November 2005). (I'm also not sure why you assume that an article about a private school must have been created by the school itself?) -- Chuq (talk) 02:58, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, no evidence of notability has been provided for any of the schools listed above. If sources can be found to show individual notability then the articles can be recreated in the future.Garrie 23:02, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. I don't support standalone articles on these schools unless there is enough material supporting a standalone article. It would be good if there was a page on the school districts or however they organise their schools in Tasmania. Capitalistroadster 02:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Good idea, the list of schools in Tasmania page could be re-arranged into a tabular format with some basic information about each school - like List of schools in the Australian Capital Territory -- Chuq (talk) 02:58, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * This is a great idea, and should be done for all states and territories, with a separate list for each state. Larger states may need breaking down using some method such as region, type, school system etc. I would be willing to help out on this--Mattinbgn/talk 03:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - If the tens of thousands of United States town articles created automatically by User:Rambot a few years ago are kept, I see no reason why these shouldn't be kept also. However, it would help if these article had a bit more content than the name of the town they are in and an external link to the schools website. If keep fails (and it looks like it will), redirect primary schools - either to the town/suburb article, the high school that it feeds into, or a general list article. If not redirected, they will only be re-created later by someone else. -- Chuq (talk) 02:58, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think there is a problem with someone creating South Arm Primary School if they can establish notability & cite their sources. So I don't particularly see the need to turn these articles into redirects, the articles haven't been around very long anyway (and I don't think they have many incoming links).Garrie 04:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The good thing is that we can create them as redirects, and they can be converted into articles later if the notability increases. -- Chuq (talk) 07:13, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete all - without prejudice to any being recreated if enough sourced material can be found. Meanwhile the way forward, as discussed above, is to add core information to list of schools in Tasmania in tabular form. TerriersFan 20:59, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletions.   -- TerriersFan 21:04, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete all per WP:N. I would say merge what little is there, but that would not be consistent with WP:A. --Butseriouslyfolks 22:33, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 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.