Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hope Academy Rwanda


 * 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.  Sandstein  14:13, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Hope Academy Rwanda

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The school was around for a relatively short period. The article was created and has mainly been edited by a COI, it doesn't cite any references, and I was unable to find anything about it in a WP:BEFORE that would pass WP:GNG, WP:NORG, or really anything else. There's one name drop of it in the reference section of a journal article, but is all I could find. I was unable to access the 4 page thing it seems to be referencing to determine if it passes the notability guidelines or not. --Adamant1 (talk) 10:45, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  12:40, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  12:40, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  12:40, 15 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. Non-notable as per nomination. Humansdorpie (talk) 14:05, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete we have to stop having articles sourced only to an organization's own website.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:30, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Per the Catalan article, there are sources in multiple languages:    . The article as it stands is terrible, but it may still be notable. SportingFlyer  T · C  11:48, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Rwanda: Ishuri Hope Academy ry'abanye Turukiya ryugawe- If the BBC consider writng about it- thats all we need for a keep. Stub class and needing a a lot of work. ClemRutter (talk) 12:52, 19 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Sure, articles about thing like the school closing and a science fair are clearly a pass of WP:GNG and WP:NORG...Right...Right..The triviality of the subjects aside, WP:GNG requires that there be "'Significant coverage' that addresses the topic 'directly and in detail'" and the two articles about them wining a science fair doesn't even discuss the school, in detail or otherwise. Except to name drop it. But hey, one of them is by the BBC, not in English, and apparently that's all that matters.


 * People should really review sources better, because I'm getting really sick of having to post messages like this one, just because people like SportingFlyer think name drops are adequate for notability. Weirdly, he doesn't seem to use the same standards when it comes to sourcing in AfDs for articles that aren't about schools for some reason. So, I get the feeling it's more about bad faithed bias and an intentional attempt to derail AfDs related to schools in Africa, by posting trivial sources in most of them, more then anything else. I'm sure he knows articles that just name drop don't pass WP:GNG. Since apparently he's an expert at this and knows the correct thing to do all the time, or at least that's how he acts. Although, I guess he does have plausible deniability in this case. Since he didn't vote. Although, I really do have to wonder why he posted sources he clearly knew didn't pass notability guidelines in the first place then. Except to give people like ClemRutter, who think an article in the BBC is an automatic notability pass no matter what and sure won't review the other sources, an excuse to vote keep. --Adamant1 (talk) 13:46, 19 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete: Article does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NSCHOOL / (WP:ORGCRIT). WP:BEFORE showed nothing that meets WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and in depth.   // Timothy ::  talk  12:18, 21 November 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.