Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fearnhill 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The result was   Keep per consensus and per withdrawn nomination (with no other delete opinions)  Keeper   |   76   |   Disclaimer  18:24, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Fearnhill School

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete no claim to notabilty made in the article, which is just one sentence long Jack1956 (talk) 22:44, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  23:04, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  23:04, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - this is a high school with a sixth form and is notable. At present, the latest Ofsted report is unavailable, which restricts development of the page. Meanwhile I note that it has a successful athletics team and there are sufficient other sources to meet WP:N. Its personal finance education has been complimented by Ofsted. The way with these stubs is to expand them which is a much better way of developing an encyclopaedia than deleting stubs. TerriersFan (talk) 00:14, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * TerriersFan, why not put some of the information you have into the article now. On the one hand,all secondary schools probably are notable, but if the article doesn't say anything about them, what's the point? DGG (talk) 01:42, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Done; I need to get my hands on the Ofsted report (the link is broken but I have emailed the school) to extend the article but it now has the necessary sources. TerriersFan (talk) 03:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep as for other highschool articles. This has one of the standard criteria, athletic championships. DGG (talk) 04:32, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep As update, the reliable and verifiable sources establish notability. Alansohn (talk) 05:39, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Nomination withdrawn in view of the recent additions. Jack1956 (talk) 08:58, 29 May 2008 (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.