Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Francistown Senior Secondary 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. T. Canens (talk) 05:20, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Francistown Senior Secondary School

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable local secondary school. Both sources in the article are primary and I was unable to find anything in a WP:BEFORE that would pass either WP:GNG or WP:NORG. As an alternative to deletion it could be merged or redirected to Francistown. As that seems to be the preferred thing to do with non-notable secondary schools. --Adamant1 (talk) 08:00, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 06:42, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 06:42, 8 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I'm a bit confused here. Is a school called Francistown Senior Secondary School really a primary school? Phil Bridger (talk) 18:28, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * And what is wring with the second source in the article? Phil Bridger (talk) 18:42, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * There's nothing to be confused about. It's called a spelling error ;) As far as the second source goes, it's an interview and interviews aren't usually considered usable for notability because they are sorta primary sources. The topic of the article, about how they suspended Saturday classes, is extremely trivial topic as anyway even if it wasn't an interview though. That kind of thing doesn't pass what WP:NORG considers a trivial topic, anymore then changes in my local grocery stores hours would, and for good reason. --Adamant1 (talk) 22:54, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * No, it is not an interview. It is a news report which includes, but is not limited to, reporting of what the head teacher said at a meeting. And the topic of the article is not the suspension of Saturday classes. Reporting of that constitutes well under 10% of the article. Phil Bridger (talk) 07:21, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Your really splitting hairs over semantics. One definition of an interview is "a meeting of people face to face" and a school meeting would qualify as one. Even if he's not sitting down with the reporter who is directly asking him questions. 99% of the article is still written from what he is saying about the school. So, it's still not a "secondary" source of information. Since it's still coming from someone directly connected to the school. Which is the important thing as far as the guidelines are concerned. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:30, 10 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep: The second source is not an interview; it's a news article that includes quotes. I've also found other coverage, including "FFS aims high academically" (June 2013). There was a big argument about the school using double shifts, which was reported in 2007 ("Students fail as MoE new system backfires") and 2010 ("Double shifts to cease in secondary schools" and "Chaotic"). It seems like the school is well-covered in Botswana news sources. — Toughpigs (talk) 03:47, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Interviews involve quotes. So, I'm not really sure what your point is. It's still an interview. Also, two of your sources are from the same news outlet as the other one. So they only count as a single source per the notability guidelines. Since to be multiple sources for the sake of notability they can't be associated with each other. As far as the other source go, I'd say it's an extremely trivial topic. The school preformed bad, then they improved. Woho. That could go for any school. The same thing happened with my local community college and high school, which they both got media coverage for (especially the college because it almost got closed down because of it). I wouldn't call either one notable because their students did crappy and got a little media attention for it though. I'm pretty sure neither would pass WP:NORG either. I'm pretty sure student performance would fall under the WP:AUD thing and "coverage of purely local events, incidents, controversies (see also #Audience below)." --Adamant1 (talk) 04:01, 10 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. sufficient coverage.  DGG ( talk ) 10:11, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep DGG and Toughpigs are correct - the subject passes our notability guide. Wm335td (talk) 03:38, 18 August 2020 (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.