Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Curriehill 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 of the debate was keep. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;   &spades;  17:41, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Curriehill Primary School
Primary school that doesn't exist anymore; no claim of historical notability NawlinWiki 03:04, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete all primary schools, especially ones that do not assert notability. Note, not existing anymore is not a bar to inclusion - we don't only include current baseball players - why should we only include existing schools? - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 03:19, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per crazy (unless the primary school has some sort of notable prestige or an event or connection that would make it otherwise notable.) Adambiswanger1 03:50, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per CrazyRussian. --Coredesat 04:10, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete per CSD A7 (no claims of notability) and possibly A1. Morgan Wick 04:36, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Notability is not a deletion criterion --Ryan Delaney talk 04:44, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * You either have no clue what the speedy deletion criteria are or that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information (and thus don't know the regular deletion criteria since WP:NOT can be cited there), or you're trying to push a WP:POINT. Notability is arguably the number one cause of non-speedy deletions. In this case, it doesn't even claim to be notable, which is a speedy deletion criterion. I apologize if this was taken as a personal attack. Morgan Wick 05:01, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * A7 is only for people and groups of people, not for schools. Please review WP:CSD. But yeah, notability is what people use to make deletion decisions, and since Wikipedia is nothing more than the sum of what Wikipedians do..... - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 05:03, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * An article about a real person, group of people, band, or club can be stretched fairly broadly. A corporation or, here, school can be seen as a group of people, band, or club. Then again, bands and clubs can be seen as groups of people. Morgan Wick 05:13, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Most admins won't honor that reading. When I am promoted in a couple of days, I won't. Besides, what's the rush? You haven't got five days? lol... - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 05:15, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Max S em 05:47, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Seeing at it is a stub and no longer exists, I don't see how it can be expanded with verifiable information. Kevin 09:26, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Schools that no longer exist are not inheirantly notable. Ydam 12:01, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep It was notable before it closed so it is notable now. Piccadilly 00:28, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Schools/Arguments. The suggestion that once a school closes it is no longer notable is laughable.  Silensor 17:22, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep all schools are notable see Schools/Arguments.  ALKIVAR &trade;[[Image:Radioactive.svg|18px|]] 17:54, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Alkivar. --Myles Long 18:01, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable school. Golfcam 17:48, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and allow for organic growth. Bahn Mi 00:37, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, most schools are notable, wether they are historical or present. bbx 07:02, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. School articles are worth having. --Elonka 08:20, 15 June 2006 (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.