Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dagfa House 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. RL0919 (talk) 22:32, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Dagfa House School

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

No significant coverage. Non-notable school. SL93 (talk) 02:24, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and England. SL93 (talk) 02:24, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Radioactive  (talk) 02:28, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge with Beeston, Nottinghamshire if not notable.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 08:40, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
 * My only problem with merging is that only a half of a sentence is referenced. We can't merge unreferenced content. SL93 (talk) 20:53, 9 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Merge The subject is not notable, better merge into Beeston, Nottinghamshire. NMasiha (talk) 20:33, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Grade II listed building, so notable per WP:GEOFEAT, the wording of which is pretty unequivocal. Happy for it to be renamed Dagfa House and refocused on the house. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:10, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 12:14, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Grade II listed building called Dagfa House School; notable per WP:GEOFEAT. AfD is not clean-up.Djflem (talk) 05:52, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Your last statement has absolutely nothing to do with this AfD. The article made no mention of it being a Grade II listed building. SL93 (talk) 10:41, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * No, it doesn't, but I have provided a reference above that it is. It's always a good idea to check whether older buildings are heritage-listed in all countries before nominating for deletion per WP:BEFORE. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:12, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I know that you did. I did follow WP:BEFORE by completing multiple searches for the school so please don't point me to that. It's not like it or anything mentions searching for if older buildings are heritage-listed. I'm not sure what is with the unfair comments, especially when the article has no chance of being deleted. SL93 (talk) 11:24, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * It wasn't intended to be an unfair comment, just a friendly pointer for the future re potentially historic buildings, which is an area I work on. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:41, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * That's fine, but I was only referring to the clean-up comment from Djflem and the pointer to BEFORE in relation to such a search. SL93 (talk) 11:44, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, there's Deletion is not cleanup and Using deletion as cleanup. The focus of the article (school) was the reason for the AfD. Since its nomination, other sources have to come to light (in this discussion) which might require "recasting" or rewriting (clean-up of) the article, but that would not be a reason for deletion. Find that a neutral statement of a fact which is fair enough if an AfD discussion. Djflem (talk) 20:38, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, what the heck is your problem? I wasn't trying to cleanup the article at all this entire time. FOR THE SECOND TIME, I KNOW THAT THERE ARE NOW SOURCES! I CAN'T withdraw this because of the merge votes. Why are you attacking me about sources that weren't originally present when I nominated the article for AfD? If you really think for some bs reason that I was trying to just clean up this article, you are very mistaken and assuming bad faith. DELETION IS NOT CLEANUP! AND I DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO WITHDRAW THIS NOMINATION PER POLICY. Why do you think I still want this deleted? I DON'T! SL93 (talk) 21:57, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I now see that you added Deletion is not cleanup to your user page before you posted it here. I don't understand your poor comprehension of the situation. SL93 (talk) 22:17, 16 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep per Djflem and Necrothesp. Passes WP:GEOFEAT, although emphasis in the article should probably be put towards the building instead of the school. HenryTemplo (talk) 10:32, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment: Since a certain editor seems to lack a basic understanding of what I'm saying and how an AfD can't be withdrawn when there are votes that aren't keep, I want to make it very clear that I would withdraw this if I could. SL93 (talk) 22:04, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I have now requested a closure of keep per consensus on the AfD talk page. SL93 (talk) 22:24, 16 June 2022 (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.