Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Old Franciscans


 * 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. RL0919 (talk) 20:53, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

List of Old Franciscans

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unsourced, arbitrary list of names. Technopat (talk) 19:45, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:18, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 02:40, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 02:40, 22 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Your unelaborated use of the word “arbitrary” makes me think you don’t understand that this is a school alumni list. Can you present an actual deletion rationale? postdlf (talk) 03:22, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Alumni lists do not need their own references if a person's affiliation is referenced in the article on that person. UnitedStatesian (talk) 17:02, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * ...and regardless, whether a notable person went to a notable school is clearly sourceable, so that issue could be fixed for this list. postdlf (talk) 19:14, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * ...and it should be fixed, but that process doesn't require deletion. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:15, 22 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Apart from the obvious lack of sources —which no one disputes, and which could, of course, be "solved" by simply adding and sending it to join the myriad other unreferenced Wikipedia pages—, this list is clearly "arbitrary", as in "random choice" of items, with zero reliable sources (possibly based on original research). While there's no objection either to school lists or to overlapping categories/lists, per se, this is precisely the kind of list better substituted by the use of categories, as in the existing Category:People educated at Instituto San Isidro, which covers this perfectly adequately and effectively rules out the "need" for this unsourced (arbitrary?) list. Notwithstanding the obvious fact that a biographee shouldn’t be included in a category if there is no actual reference in the article itself to substantiate the claim. Regarding the above rationale for the Keep ("Alumni lists do not need their own references if a person's affiliation is referenced in the article on that person."), that's precisely the problem: before opening this AfD I took the time to check twelve of the linked biography articles on this list —at random— and there was no mention whatsoever of the biographee in question having had any association with the school, except for the added category. Nor, unsurprisingly, any reference to that effect... (Stand-alone_lists: “Selection criteria… should be unambiguous, objective, and supported by reliable sources. In cases where the membership criteria are subjective or likely to be disputed… it is especially important that inclusion be based on reliable sources given with inline citations for each item…”). Furthermore, the list currently lacks a lead section (Stand-alone_lists: "A stand-alone list should begin with a lead section that summarizes its content, provides any necessary background information, gives encyclopedic context, links to other relevant articles, and makes direct statements about the criteria by which members of the list were selected, unless inclusion criteria are unambiguously clear from the article title. This introductory material is especially important for lists that feature little or no other non-list prose in their article body…”). By the way, although a minor detail, it's actually pretty symptomatic of the problems this particular list raises: an image caption that states "Former pupils of Instituto San Isidro are called Old Franciscans, after the school's re-establisher, Saint Francis Xavier". A claim that is not only unsourced, but also doubtful, possibly misleading or, at best, open to debate. Regards, --Technopat (talk) 22:57, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep, completely standard list of notable alumni from a notable educational institute. The nominator raises nothing but fixable issues and inapt adjectives. Add sources, retitle it for clarity, add an intro, remove factually inaccurate entries... See WP:BEFORE, WP:ATD, WP:PRESERVE. postdlf (talk) 01:29, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - Valid topic for an article. List needs improvement, by the addition of references, not deletion. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:36, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - List of people from x school is a relatively common, such as List of Old Etonians born in the 20th century, List of Old Geelong Grammarians, List of Old Wykehamists, List of Old Alleynians and more. I don't believe we should be deleting a single example of these "arbitrary list of names" unless we can establish a consensus of action for all such arbitrary lists which should not be kept for other reasons. With that said, as User:Technopat said, these may be better suited as a category, such as Category:People educated at Gordonstoun, but I don't believe we should be deleting lists before categorization - the data would be useful in the process. --  No COBOL  (talk) 13:03, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * ”Better suited as a category” doesn’t mean anything here, particularly when this list is already performing at least two functions that are impossible for a category. Each format has its advantages and limitations, which is the whole point of WP:NOTDUP, and part of sound informational organization (not to mention basic web design) is providing multiple avenues of navigation and indexing. So let’s please stop suggesting that we can do only one thing when we can and should do many. postdlf (talk) 13:41, 23 January 2019 (UTC)


 * DeleteThe problem is that not all of them are alumni. Victor Hugo? According to this article, he studied in San Antón school run by the Escolapios. Maybe he just went to S. Isidro to take exams (as a venue). There is no reference to the term "Old Franciscans".  Franciscans, at least in Spain, refers to the Order of St. Francis, and if such a group of alumni did exist, in Spain they would be called "Javieristas" or "Xavieristas" referring to St. Francis Xavier. Agree that the best thing would be to include the personalites proven to have studied there in a category and this list should be deleted or moved to a sandbox and use it to confirm that they did in fact study there (adding a reference in the respective article of each individual) before including them in a category.  As it stands, this list is totally misleading, including individudals who may not have studied there at all and maybe just went to give a speech or take exams. --Maragm (talk) 14:07, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * This would have been much better brought up as a talk page discussion rather than a deletion discussion that tends to lead to a yes/no answer. There seem to be at least three issues here: whether this should be a separate article from Instituto San Isidro, if so what should its title be, and whether each individual name should be on the list. The first is a matter for a merge discussion, the second for a move discussion and the third for editing based on reliable sources. None of them require an admin to hit the "delete" button. Phil Bridger (talk) 14:36, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unless it is heavily reformed. As it currently stands, title included, the list includes dubious information, not necessarily verifiable either here or in the independent articles.--Asqueladd (talk) 16:45, 23 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete. OK, so the bottom line is that this AfD has been opened in the context of a major overhaul, including rewriting/wikifying/removing unsourced nonsense, that has been carried out on "related" articles by several Wikipedians of long-standing reputation over the past few months at Wikipedia in Spanish and in Catalan, overhauls that have already resulted in the category at Commons being deleted for the same reasons exposed here.


 * As can be seen here (Instituto San Isisdro) and here (Reales Estudios de San Isidro), the original article pages from which this list purportedly derives, this major overhaul, basically includes eliminating cruft, when not downright nonsense/possible hoaxes, including contributions from the likes of "I’m a student here and I know what I’m talking about"…


 * As I already have my work cut out trying to make the "related" main articles mentioned above fit for Wikipedia in English, I cordially invite any user who still insists on the encyclopaedic relevance of this list to carry out the necessary work —which everyone seems to agree on— required to make this list conform, even minimally, to Wikipedia policies, including providing the relevant references —reliable sources— in the original biographical articles linked here. I'll be happy to help out to the best of my abilities, if anyone has a specific doubt, or regarding translating of any available sources, but it, in the light of all the other stuff that needs doing, this list certainly ain’t a priority for me and, as it stands, is pure unadulterated original research and should not, as far as I'm concerned, remain at Wikipedia.


 * The basic problem, as evidenced by the absolute lack of references, is that the whole (include here the adjective that you consider least "inapt") page is flawed since its inception. As pointed out above, the sui generis term "Old Franciscans" simply does not exist except when referring to "old", in at least of the meanings of the word, members of the Franciscans, who, of course, never had anything to do with that particular building in Madrid, at any moment in history (despite the lovely image currently adorning the page showing Francis Xavier, a Jesuit).


 * The accumulation of some of the errors can be partly understood as arising from the fact that the 16th century building (or complex) has housed several different education institutions, including the Colegio Imperial de Madrid and the Instituto San Isidro, established in 1845 and the forerunner of today’s Superior Technical School of Architecture of Madrid, the latter occupying part of the premises from 1847 to 1936. However, claims such as King Juan Carlos and Queen Fabilo studying there are downright wrong —like many of the others on the list, they did not study there: they simply went to the building to sit the public exams—. The case of Victor Hugo is even worse as, according to most (all?) reliable sources, he attended the Escuelas Pías (Piarists) de San Antón, not the Instituto San Isidro nor the Colegio Imperial de Madrid). Not to mention the case of Cervantes, thankfully deleted already from the list before I took this on.


 * What really worries me, however, is that in the light of what increasingly appears to be simply a hoax —at least two of the main contributors to the list ( and ) have been blocked indefinitely— can have survived here, the Wikipedia that is most closely monitored and protected, for more than two years... I should have probably have better proposed it for speedy delete, —although I thought that a discussion (among the members of the community at large, not just users who already have the list on their watchlist…) was called for—. Regards, --Technopat (talk) 17:50, 23 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete. We should have somewhere on Wikipedia a list of alumni of this school, but, in the light of what has been written above, I see that the title of this article is unsubstantiated (so it should not be a redirect, besides the common sense that "Old Franciscan" must have many other potential meanings) and that the content cannot be trusted. Without the title or the content there will be nothing left to keep. The article about the school is neither long enough to need splitting nor so short that to include verified notable alumni there would unbalance it, so it would be best if those who are interested could include sourced entries at Instituto San Isidro and only split it out into a separate article if and when it becomes large. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:38, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. I agree with Phil.--Latemplanza (talk) 19:26, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. An article introducing a name (Old Franciscans) that does not seem to exist anywhere but in Wikipedia is a straightforward violation of the most basic Wikipedia principles. --Discasto (talk) 22:13, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete, In light of the additional information provided by Technopat. --  No COBOL  (talk) 05:24, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. Old Franciscan isn't even a term on Wikipedia and the article appears to be mostly original research. Ajf773 (talk) 06:59, 27 January 2019 (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.