Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dubbo College


 * 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 no consensus. Arguments split between keeping, redirecting or some other non-delete action. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  10:08, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Dubbo College

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Previously deleted, not notable - fails WP:NSCHOOL as per WP:ORG: "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject." Alexandermcnabb (talk) 07:32, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 07:32, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 07:32, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:41, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep: As a technicality, this is a state funded college- WP:ORG only applies to private schools. So applying WP:GNG, we have to prove there will be independent references- not find or evaluate them. In one minute of looking at one of the schools (there are multiple)Portal pages I was directed here. Closing the gap. Another ref is about community scolarships. I am not an expert on the education of Native peoples- but do see this as an equalities issue too. Another few minutes and other references will be there. Can we please we withdraw this AfD. ClemRutter (talk) 10:03, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment "All universities, colleges and schools, including high schools, middle schools, primary (elementary) schools, and schools that only provide a support to mainstream education must either satisfy WP:ORG, general notability guideline, or both." Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:10, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment I am quoting the WP:ORG policy page: This page is to help determine whether an organization (commercial or otherwise), or any of its products and services, is a valid subject for a separate Wikipedia article dedicated solely to that organization, product, or service. The scope of this guideline covers all groups of people organized together for a purpose with the exception of non-profit educational institutions, religions or sects,. I am just drawing this to folks' attention that you use WP:GNG for state schools and WP:ORG or WP:GNG for private schools. I agree that this is messy and doesn't help the newbie, or retain experienced editors from elsewhere who try to help out in schools. I think there are safer ways of sorting out school notability based on their affiliation, size and history. But there we are.ClemRutter (talk) 09:16, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Actually it goes further than that. Many (probably most) private schools are non-profit, so the general notability guideline can be used for them in preference to the tougher WP:ORG. Phil Bridger (talk) 10:31, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - The age and location of the school justify the presumption that there will be adequate suitable sources, so WP:NEXIST applies. Ingratis (talk) 13:44, 23 May 2021 (UTC) (the "previous deletion" was as an A1 in 2008). Ingratis (talk) 13:52, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep: The current state of the article is terribly inadequate, but there is enough in it to show that the school is an important institution in the region and deserving of a well-researched and well-written article.Sammyrice (talk) 23:15, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   08:35, 30 May 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete Just saying a subject deserves a well researched article doesn't cut it unless the sources necessary to create are available. Which in this case, they don't seem to be. Since from what I can tell everything out there about it is extremely trivial. Otherwise, people who think the article should be kept can provide WP:THREE independent sources that address the subject directly and in-depth to actually make a good article with. If so, I'll be more then happy to change my vote to keep. I doubt anyone will though. --Adamant1 (talk) 23:15, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment Just for convenience: the 'Keep' votes here are all problematic. Firstly, WP:NSCHOOL, the guideline I cited in this nomination, reads: "All universities, colleges and schools, including high schools, middle schools, primary (elementary) schools, and schools that only provide a support to mainstream education must either satisfy WP:ORG, general notability guideline, or both. For-profit educational organizations and institutions are considered commercial organizations and must satisfy those criteria." (my bold, clearly). So the idea of the profitable status of the school deserving some special treatment or status is specifically ruled out. The guideline applies to ALL schools and there is an additional requirement for for-profit schools to pass WP:ORG, which I also cite and which this school does not pass in any case. Additionally, the idea that the age and location of an institution justify the presumption of notability is not to be found (quite rightly) in any guideline. WP:NEXIST, in fact, specifically states "However, once an article's notability has been challenged, merely asserting that unspecified sources exist is seldom persuasive" (Again, my bold). Finally, the argument that the school is deserving of a well-researched and well-written article is clearly not in any guideline - and the question here is not what the school deserves, but whether it is notable enough to deserve anything. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 04:42, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 22:48, 6 June 2021 (UTC) Comment - I've not found any more online, but a school over 100 years old in a country of high literacy (age and location) is likely to have generated more sources than have appeared here (WP:COMMONSENSE). Rather than gleefully deleting, redirect to Dubbo (WP:ATD). Ingratis (talk) 12:35, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Dubbo#Education. VV 20:08, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment, reading the above, why is there so much discussion about WP:NORG and WP:GNG? looking at the "nutshell" for norg: "An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources.", and at gng: "A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject," the same, so whats the issue? Coolabahapple (talk) 02:35, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment I'd be fine with redirecting to the identified target as an alternative to deletion. --Adamant1 (talk) 06:25, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment, has anybody looked at Trove for sources (sorry i cant at the mo as work beckons:))? Coolabahapple (talk) 09:10, 16 June 2021 (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.