Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gyan Bharti Public 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 delete. Secondary schools are no longer assumed to be notable. As no evidence of notability has been presented during this discussion - via significant coverage in multiple reliable sources independent of the subject - this article's subject is deemed to be unfit for inclusion at this time. &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 03:01, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Gyan Bharti Public School

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:BRANCH, unclear after quick Google search if this can be remedied. I am assuming it cannot, but I will withdraw if I'm wrong. South Nashua (talk) 20:10, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 11:10, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 11:10, 5 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep as a secondary school per longstanding precedent and consensus. I have no idea how it fails WP:BRANCH since it isn't a branch of anything. Please explain. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:55, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * It may well be a language issue but I cannot find enough English reliable sources to meet GNG. Apparently Odia is the dominant language in the region. Perhaps some Indian editors could check. But as a result of the RfC on secondary school notability, mere proof of existence is no longer sufficient, and I can't find enough references to establish notability. Delete Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:27, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete for lack of notability (DEL8) as the available sourcing does not amount to the significant, independent coverage in reliable sources required by NSCHOOLS, the guideline that our recent, widely-attended RFC reaffirmed is the standard we use. That said, I too am puzzled by the nomination's reference to BRANCH. Furthermore, no lecture intended, but I believe we expect nominators to perform in good faith the search described in BEFORE part D before opening any notability-related deletion discussion. An even more rigorous search ought to be conducted before nominating an article about a school—a responsibility that the close for the RFC emphasized in some detail. Rebb  ing  02:25, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * It appears that much of the information has been deleted from the article. If it contained copyright material, maybe that came from a useful reference that could establish notability. It doesn't seem a good practice to reduce an article to a single line and then nominate it for deletion. The implication is that practically the entire article was copyvio. According to policy at WP:CV, the appropriate response is to re-write the page, and if that is not possible to speedy delete. If speedy deletion did not apply, then the article should have been tagged and listed at Copyright problems. This is intended to allow contributors a week to verify permission for the text or to propose a rewrite. I searched for it at Copyright problems and it is not listed. I don't see anywhere in the copyvio policy about AfD. Why have policy at all if it's just going to be the Wild West around here? Jack N. Stock (talk) 08:12, 8 March 2017 (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.