Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chapel-en-le-Frith 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. It should be remembered that in cases like this a WP:BOLD redirect per WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES is a viable alternative. The Bushranger One ping only 09:36, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Chapel-en-le-Frith Primary School

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable school. Primary schools have been held to not meet basic notability guidelines. D P  21:20, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * The author has claimed "the first forced church school academy conversion", I will await to see the significance of that claim. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:03, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:49, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:49, 7 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Primary schools are almost entirely non notable. The school appears to be in "special measures", for those who don't know this means its currently so badly run government inspectors have either removed the headmaster or school governors, or perhaps both. If the school doesn't improve it may be shut. No refs or indication of notability. Szzuk (talk) 19:04, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 05:52, 14 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep Such schools always have basic notability by virtue of the inspection reports which are detailed, independent and reliable per WP:SIGCOV. In this case, the school was a pioneer in the use of the internet, as detailed in Handbook for Beginning Teachers and Technology tools in the social studies curriculum. Andrew (talk) 06:56, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Every school has an inspection report so by that logic every primary school and indeed nursery is notable. Szzuk (talk) 15:21, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Why is this a problem?  Does it bother you that we cover every lighthouse and railway station too? Andrew (talk) 08:23, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
 * How about we cut to the chase - there are no refs. Are you going to do anything about that? or continue in your vain quest to list every primary school. Szzuk (talk) 17:16, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
 * delete By longstanding consensus primary schools are not notable in and of themselves. If news about this school's fate were to go well beyond local coverage some other outcome might be justified. Mangoe (talk) 15:48, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
 * There is no general consensus about schools as attempts to establish a guideline like Notability (schools) have repeatedly failed. Instead of a failed guideline, we have the policy WP:PRESERVE which indicates that we should prefer alternatives to deletion. Andrew (talk) 08:23, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I have never seen a primary school survive a deletion discussion, which is as good a demonstration of a consensus as is needed. I would also point out that in the USA some school districts have pretty detailed reports and statistics, and some do not; it does not make the former notable and the latter unremarkable. The data is ephemeral anyway. Mangoe (talk) 12:33, 16 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom & Szzuk. - →Davey 2010→ →Talk to me!→  21:05, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and additionally it's an academy converter of which there are thousands now. Nothing notable about this one. Atlas-maker (talk) 21:49, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Point of information Despite the attitude of several Wikipedia editors there is, and never has been, any such ruling that Primary Schools are automatically non-notable. Also, the comments relating to the status of the school according to the current government is of no concern one way or another.  The simple ruling is whether enough third-party coverage of this school can be located and applied to the article.  (Of course, as Wikipedia is now ruled by peer-supporting deletionists this article won't survive, and would not survive if the school had been mentioned in a hundred global reports.)  DiverScout (talk) 15:47, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Despite my POI above, and what reads to me as the false statement of the proposer that Primary Schools automatically fail notabilty, a Google search fails to find much third-party supporting material for this individual school, and Primary Schools do not have the automatic notability afforded to Secondary Schools. DiverScout (talk) 16:34, 17 April 2014 (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.