Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kendriya Vidyalaya No. 1, Naharlagun


 * 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. Daniel (talk) 04:30, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Kendriya Vidyalaya No. 1, Naharlagun

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Article does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NSCHOOL / (WP:ORGCRIT). Subject lacks WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV that addresses the subject directly and in-depth. There is basic, run of the mill, routine, normal, coverage. Sources in the article are not IS RS with SIGCOV. BEFORE revealed nothing that meets SIGCOV.  // Timothy ::  talk  04:52, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 05:22, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 05:22, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 05:22, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   20:41, 11 January 2021 (UTC) Delete: - fails WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES which says (like Bearian above), inter-alia: At one time, secondary schools were assumed notable unless sources could not be found to prove existence, but following a February 2017 RFC, secondary schools are not presumed to be notable simply because they exist, and are still subject to WP:N and WP:ORG. and WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. --Whiteguru (talk) 06:45, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, WP:MILL, and WP:TNT. I agree with the nomination. In addition, this appears to be a very run of the mill school, one of perhaps a million in India. The formatting is such a mess that it needs to be started from scratch in any case, even if it were notable. I note that even under my rather lax standards, it only has 6/10 factors, thus getting a failing grade from me. Bearian (talk) 00:26, 15 January 2021 (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.