Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Association of American Schools in Central America


 * 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. ✗ plicit  13:01, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Association of American Schools in Central America

 * – ( View AfD View log )

School districts are generally notable, and this seems like kind of an equivalent. However, I couldn't find evidence of meeting WP:ORG or WP:GNG. Thia has been in CAT:NN for 12 years; hopefully, we can now resolve it. Boleyn (talk) 21:34, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:00, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:54, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Costa Rica-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:54, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of El Salvador-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:55, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Guatemala-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:55, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nicaragua-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:55, 4 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete No need of a separate article for this association for now. ArvindPalaskar (talk) 04:46, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment. Was a WP:BEFORE search done? In just looking through google books it seems like there is enough RS to possibly pass GNG.4meter4 (talk) 06:24, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak keep . There is some quality RS within education policy literature and some coverage elsewhere. Not sure about the independence of the last source, but it is published by another party. See:
 * Based on High King's analysis below; changing to delete.4meter4 (talk) 15:32, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Based on High King's analysis below; changing to delete.4meter4 (talk) 15:32, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Based on High King's analysis below; changing to delete.4meter4 (talk) 15:32, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Based on High King's analysis below; changing to delete.4meter4 (talk) 15:32, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Based on High King's analysis below; changing to delete.4meter4 (talk) 15:32, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:56, 11 September 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  00:20, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Honduras-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:18, 20 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep - was WP:BEFORE conducted? Almost certainly not! This nomination was launched less than 60 seconds after an edit to an unrelated article. Accepting that anyone could possibly have considered the availability of sources in that time is beyond common sense. Besides which, there seem to be plenty of available sources and the ones listed above would seem to suggest the subject meets WP:GNG.  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 03:46, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  HighKing++ 13:53, 21 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete This is an organization so WP:NCORP applies, not GNG. With regard to the commentary about WP:BEFORE - people really need to WP:AGF, the nominator may have conducted WP:BEFORE sometime in the past, perhaps last week and not necessarily just before this AfD. As to the references ... I've read them. None - not a single one - meets WP:NCORP (and makes me wonder how anyone who read the references could even say they met GNG for that matter) as follows:
 * "Making Mission Statements Operational: Perceptions of Principals from Tri-Association Schools" doesn't even mention the topic organization (even though they are members of the Tri-Association) much less have WP:CORPDEPTH in-depth information
 * "Global to Local Curriculum Policy Processes: Policy Implications of Research in Education" gets a mention in passing on page 33. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH.
 * "The American Sponsored Overseas School Headship: Two Decades of Change and the Road Ahead" gets a mention in passing on page 15. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH.
 * John Catt Guide to International Schools 2010/11 contains a profile which contains information from the organization's website with no "Independent Content" as per WP:ORGIND.
 * Based on the the above references and my own unsuccessful searching, I cannot locate a single reference that meets the criteria for establishing notability, topic fails NCORP.  HighKing++ 14:40, 21 September 2021 (UTC)


 * I'm striking my vote on the basis of 's more detailed analysis of sources. As for AGF, the barest assessment of this nominator's edits and track record is enough to confirm that it is highly unlikely that WP:BEFORE was conducted at some stage in the past, especially given that WP:BEFORE requires much more than a quick google search.  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 01:14, 23 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete - agree with High King's analysis of available sourcing Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:54, 24 September 2021 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.</b> 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.