Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Colins performing arts 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 of the debate was MOOT. The previous article, a one-liner that failed to even explain where the school is, was a clear-cut CSD A1 candidate, and I'm sorry I didn't speedy it when I first saw it. That non-stub has been replaced with a redirect to an actual stub, mooting the grand majority of the delete arguments, so I am closing this particular discussion as resolved, as neither the title nor the contents of that less-than-a-stub now exist anywhere on Wikipedia save buried in page history somewhere.

That said, this is not intended to be an endorsement of the stub at Colin's Performing Arts School, as that stub did not exist during the bulk of this discussion. If someone wishes to list that stub on AFD (Eris help them), this is not a relevant precedent to protect that stub and should not be cited as such. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 21:38, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Colin's Performing Arts School
Article is a review, not an encyclopedia entry. Plus I don't know if its notable since googling "Colins performing arts school" only came up with 12 results. Akamad 10:11, 14 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. Colins Remedial Spelling School would be more beneficial. vandals are people too! User's contributions are a trail of crappy vandalism. - Randwicked 10:51, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Please review WP:CIVIL. Kappa 11:30, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh, for the love of... please be civil, even to anons. Everyone started out as a clueless newbie, and if this had been the reception to my first work (not the AFD, but the incivility) I would not still be here on Wikipedia. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 12:42, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I do not believe all the edits made by 212.85.15.78 are by the same person. The general style of this article seems perfectly sincere to me, and is very different from the style of some of the edits that Randwicked calls, "crappy vandalism." In any case, we should be discussing the article, as the keep/delete decision should depend on the article and not on the contributor. Good articles by crappy vandals should, of course, be kept. By the way... what, exactly, would be high-quality vandalism and how does it differ from crappy vandalism? No, never mind, don't answer that. Dpbsmith (talk) 00:24, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * This is high-quality vandalism. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 10:42, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) Wow! (In fact... Oooh! AAAAAAAAA!) 2) Thank you for not answering my question. Dpbsmith (talk) 14:39, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Utterly devoid of content, no sign that this is a degree-granting or even accredited school. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 12:33, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Dottore So 13:46, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I removed the personal and POV parts of this article and it is left with one sentence, that does not even tell us where the school is. &spades;DanMS 16:59, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, no content, no assertion of notability. Google results do not seem to provide enough information for verifiable expansion. --Aquillion 17:40, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, lack of verifiable info.Gateman1997 17:59, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete due to lack of verifiability. If references can be cited before the close of this discussion I will change my vote.  Silensor 23:33, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete or userfy. Just barely verifiable and not notable. To the anon who created this: if you create a Wikipedia account, which is free, takes about fifteen seconds, and doesn't require disclosure of any personal information, you can choose any username you like. You get a personal user page, and this material would be perfectly suitable for it. Also, user pages get indexed by Google so people searching for this would still find it, just not in the main encyclopedia. It would be nice to know if this school is spelled "Collins" with two L's or "Colins" with one L. Google shows sporadic hits on both. I'm thinking this is Collins Performing Arts School and College in or near London, "trains students from 3 – 16." One of the relatively few hits is a resume of an actress named Nikki Thomas who attended Colins (with one L) and has done some work in commercials. Dpbsmith (talk) 00:24, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * keep this please if it can be verified Yuckfoo 00:45, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, schools article should at the very, very least have a location. This doesn't provide any useful content. - Mgm|(talk) 09:11, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * It's almost certainly in the UK, probably near London, possibly in Havering... to judge from the handful of Google hits. Anyone know a good online London yellow pages? Dpbsmith (talk) 13:41, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Bingo! Hey, it's "Colin's," one L and an apostrophe, just as it appears in Ingalisa Hassler's resume.
 * Colin's Performing Arts Ltd
 * The Studios, 219b, North St, Romford, Essex RM1 4QA
 * Tel: 01708 766007
 * Classification:
 * Dancing Schools
 * Hey, would you believe that apostrophe makes ALL the difference? Google on "Colin's Performing Arts School" and you find: http://www.colinsperformingarts.co.uk/school.htm


 * Delete no sources -- red stucco 09:46, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment Now that I know what it is, it is clear that it is not notable. Dpbsmith (talk) 14:02, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep A school. Hipocrite - &laquo; Talk &raquo; 14:48, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete A school.  Grue   18:39, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep It exists, doesn't it?  Furthermore, the nominator (and many of the deletionist vandals wishing to delete) fundamentally misunderstand the purpose of deletion.  Deletion is not a judgment on the content of the article; if there are problems with the content then the article should be revised, not deleted.  Deletion policy even says as much, although the deletionist vandals conveniently ignore that part of their holy book.  Deletion is a judgment on the worthiness of the topic of the article itself for inclusion--and anything that exists is worthy for inclusion.  Kurt Weber 14:36, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delay please. Can I ask this AFD not be closed until at least five days after DBsmith found the web site.  I think there was good basis of deletion early on, but now I think there probably is a basis for keeping it; yet I haven't had time to know that for sure (I only noticed the fix just now).   Rather than just vote "keep" I'ld rather we just pause and review what's now known (as I haven't had time evaluate what info I've read, its verifiability, and its signficance).  --Rob 20:52, 19 November 2005 (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.