Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heywood Preparatory 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   merge to Corsham. Ron Ritzman (talk) 13:45, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Heywood Preparatory School

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Very small private primary  school. has not been in  existence very  long  and does not  appear to  have achieved anything  noteworthy. PROD was removed by creator without comment  or significant  improvement. Sources are only directory  listings and the Ofsted report. Article fails WP:GNG and is possibly WP:SPIP. Primary schools have no defacto notability  for automatic inclusion  in  the encyclopedia. Kudpung (talk) 16:57, 9 October 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  —Kudpung (talk) 17:07, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  —Kudpung (talk) 17:11, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:43, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete or Merge to Corsham. Elementary schools are not generally independently notable, and this one seems no exception. Edison (talk) 01:16, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - I  will go  along  with  any  suggestion  to  merge às this is our usual procedure in  such cases, if it is possible.--Kudpung (talk) 12:14, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge to Corsham. This is usually the best solution for local facilities.  This claims to take children from 3 to 11, rather than 13 as usual for prep schools.  This is thus a private primary school.  State primary schools are usually merged to their village or town; and the sam policy should be followed here.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:09, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Comment - If this had been a PROD the article would have gone by now.I  think  we have a consensus to  merge, so  I  suggest  merging  what  can  be used to  Corsham, and leaving  a redirect  as per our standard procedure for primary  schools. I  will  do  this if there are no  objections.--Kudpung (talk) 01:32, 16 October 2010 (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.