Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexandria Country Day 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 Snowball Delete - almost a speedy. Tawker 01:07, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Alexandria Country Day School

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Fails both WP:LOCAL and WP:SCHOOLS3. Article was originally a redirect and now only contains non-notable elementary/middle school info. Is Wikipedia really the place for articles on non-notable day schools? Bobo is soft 02:18, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Although I agree it should be deleted, I don't think a proposed guideline should be listed as a reason. It should be struck through or deleted from the nomination reason. John Reaves (talk) 02:23, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * CommentWikipedia does not have a process for a proposed guideline to become an official guideline except by citing it here to show it is used and useful, and claiming that there is consensus on the article talk page that it is ready to be a guideline. So it is appropriate to quote proposed guidelines here if you want them to be official ones. If you don't, then go to the talk for the guideline and say so, or slap a "disputed" tag on it. Edison 03:17, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and WP:SCHOOLS3. Edison 03:17, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. MER-C 04:25, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom Jaranda wat's sup 07:28, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:SCHOOLS3 is a proposal I entirely support, but here, no reliable nontrivial secondary sourcing is provided, meaning subject also fails an existing guideline, namely WP:N. Seraphimblade 17:47, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per Seraphimblade without prejudice to re-creation. If an article about a school consists primarily of quotations from the student handbook, it probably does not belong in Wikipedia. --Metropolitan90 20:40, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. No evidence of notability; possible partial copyvio; inadequate references. WMMartin 14:43, 5 February 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.