Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caroline Chisholm 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 keep ɑʀкʏɑɴ 21:01, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Caroline Chisholm School

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Schools aren't automatically notable for all manner of reasons. This particular school/article actually asserts non-notability by the fact that it is unable to get pupils to fill its roster WebHamster 11:22, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - sorry but that last comment doesn't accurately represent the position - it is not a question of being "unable to get pupils to fill its roster" rather than the school being expanded in stages. TerriersFan 19:58, 25 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete unless sufficient sources can be found to establish notability. Jakew 12:19, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. I'm persuaded by TerriersFan's work that this subject is notable. Jakew 20:46, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, and why was this article create from the requests for article creation? There are no sources! - Ta bu shi da yu 13:47, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep now that it is sourced. - Ta bu shi da yu 23:48, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletions.   -- the wub  "?!"  18:17, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per a complete lack of source material, reliable or otherwise. Clearly violates WP:NOT and WP:N. VanTucky  (talk) 18:23, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong keep - I have now sourced it up. This is the only through 4-18 state school in the UK. Education Secretary Ruth Kelly said the school was a national model for the future - in the UK you can't get a more notable endorsement than that! Further, highlighting the education of children with Asperger’s Syndrome, Ofsted described the school as "unique", a designation I have not seen before from them in many hundreds of Ofsted reports. TerriersFan 19:39, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * She's hardly an independent source. She signed off on the 25m to build the place. Sounds like political spin to me. WebHamster 20:25, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Kelly signed off many school builds but I doubt you will be able to source a similar quote about any other school. Whatever, the article now plainly meets WP:N. TerriersFan 20:39, 25 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep - Notable for the fanfare that accompanied its establishment, even if the school itself has yet to accomplish anything much.--orlady 23:34, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong keep - Fully sourced and notability well established. Dahliarose 23:43, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Notability established by good sourcing. Davewild 08:10, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep, article as updated (kudos to TerriersFan!) asserts notability, and provides ample reliable and verifiable sources to satisfy the Notability standard. Alansohn 09:16, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep only had time to assess the article as mid importance. 16:51, 26 August 2007 (UTC)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Victuallers (talk • contribs)
 * Withdraw Nomination after the additional work done on the article the reasons for the nomination are moot, so I'ld like to withdraw the nomination. WebHamster 23:23, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per TerriersFan. -- DS1953 talk 22:17, 27 August 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.