Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bucklers mead


 * 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. —Quarl (talk) 2007-03-08 13:44Z 

Bucklers mead

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Clearly does not assert notability, and is defiantly not in the tone expected of an encyclopedia. —— Eagle 101  Need help? 07:06, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as per above. Someguy1221 08:34, 3 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete if not the whole article, then at least the bit about the student; obviously unencyclopedic – Qxz 15:12, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, as per nomination. Jeodesic 16:12, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Partial Deletion, I believe that the article shoudn't be deleted as it is a real school, and the ofsted claim is also true. However, the paragraph about Daniel McNiven should be removed as he is actually a real person and an acquaintance of mine, however for his privacy i believe the paragrpah about him should be deleted.DoubleBassist 18:55, 3 March 2007 (GMT)
 * Delete, in entirety. The school's article does not assert as to why it is notable.  Let's completely disregard that Mr. McNiven's blurb therein makes it look an awful lot like a Myspace page.  Note that I will change my mind about the notability if I can be proven otherwise, but Mr. McNiven does not belong there. --Dennisthe2 19:19, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - removed McNiven's bit. --Dennisthe2 19:21, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Notability neither asserted nor evidenced, and no references. WMMartin 13:40, 5 March 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.