Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kayempur High 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. Consensus is for the article to be retained. North America1000 00:20, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Kayempur High School

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Weak article conveying nothing beyond the bare (and unsourced) existence of this school. Contested PROD. —  Jeff G. ツ (talk)   03:30, 27 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep Redirect to Kayempur per standard procedure. Established mainstream high school. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:44, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete For far too long, WP:GNG has not been applied to any articles relating to the Indian sub continent. We should not do this. Even articles on tiny Indian villages and implicitly notable high schools should still be required to have some sourcing, per WP:V.
 * Do not redirect, as we have nothing to redirect to. Nor is it a lexically difficult leap from "Kayempur High School" to "Kayempur". Leave that sort of this to search engine matchers, not hard-coded redirects. (My position here would be different for schools that weren't simply suffixes of their district.) Andy Dingley (talk) 10:28, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:12, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:12, 27 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep, according to WP:NHS Ibrahim Husain Meraj (talk) 17:00, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * WP:NHS actually states "Articles on high schools and secondary schools, with rare exceptions, have been kept when nominated at Articles for Deletion except where they fail verifiability." Note the need for verifiability, which this article fails. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:40, 27 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. It's weak, it conveys little, and I would have preferred that it had never been created, but it was, it's a secondary school, and it now cites a reliable source as to its existence, so let's move on. Worldbruce (talk) 18:00, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Worldbruce has summed it up well. Joefromrandb (talk) 21:52, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Kayempur - Worldbruce is bang on The article is aboslute shite on so many levels but at the end of the day it's been here 3 years and it's only been sourced now (and it's only 1 source!), I appreciate sources elsewhere aren't as great as in the UK/US but this won't ever be improved and in the next year or so it'll be left to rot and then renominated, I can't !vote Keep on an article I know won't ever be improved nor sourced, I know SCHOOLOUTCOMES states high schools should be kept but I'm sure we can bend the rules now & again. – Davey 2010 Talk 02:11, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - Well If everyone wants it kept I may aswell follow everyone like a sheep, Not entirely convinced on it being kept but whatever. – Davey 2010 Talk 13:38, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep or Merge with redirect per outcomes. VMS Mosaic (talk) 05:43, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. Certainly seems to exist and that's enough for a secondary school per longstanding consensus and precedent. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:30, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   11:13, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep per longstanding consensus at AfD that second schools of confirmed existence are presumed notable. I suppose we could spend a few hours parsing Hindi-language sources and battling over whether they are sufficient or not, but why? The rule of thumb on schools saves us from wasting time on such debates. If a high school is out there, like a populated place, or a mountain, or a major highway, it should be part of WP. Carrite (talk) 12:32, 13 October 2015 (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.