Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of schools in South Korea


 * 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. Consensus is that this is simply an indiscriminate list. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:11, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

List of schools in South Korea

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This article is just a collection of external link and one miscellaneous not-sourced fact. More than 1 and half years have past but we have not seen it getting better than this. According to WP:NOTDIR and WP:LINK, this article should be deleted. Thorough recreation of this list is required for being part of Encyclopedia. Hitro 11:15, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Starts with the proposition that there are more than 500,000 schools in South Korea, has links to four of them... only 499,996 to go. That's probably the reason that this never went any further.  Even a list only 1% complete would be too long to be useful. Mandsford (talk) 14:39, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 16:06, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 16:06, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 16:06, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, comes close to the no-content criterion for speedy deletion. Definitely not a useful list.  Nyttend (talk) 23:51, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per above and also as a Category masquerading as a list. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 02:16, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. I know this isn't really relevant to deletion, but I must point it beggars belief that a country with a population of 50 million has half a million schools. Even if 20% of the population are of school age (which must be an over-estimate) that means that the average school enrolment is 20. Phil Bridger (talk) 17:39, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep We have lists of schools for other Asian countries, such as Indonesia and Kuwait, though others, such as the one for Kazakhstan, are only universities. Heck, here's a whole template full of them. I agree 500,000 is BS, but listing schools by country seems to be an ongoing thing. If every secondary school is inherently notable, why isn't a list of them notable? Matt Deres (talk) 00:03, 6 July 2009 (UTC) (forgot to sign in)
 * Keeping WP:OTHERSTUFF in Mind, We can not consider to keep this article just because we have lists of school for other Asian countries. Please remember this article has not seen remarkable improvement for 19 months now. The 2 of external links out of 3 lead to closed sites. I think articles/lists like these degrade the quality of Wikipedia.  Hitro  07:25, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Then WP:SOFIXIT :-). I didn't mention the other school lists because "if we have one, we should have more"; I agree that's not a proper argument. My point was simply that a)such a list can be presented properly and b)there are obviously people working on such lists. The article is very poor - that is a cause to clean it up, not delete it. I'm fixing the stupid 500,000 thing now - with a reference! Matt Deres (talk) 00:06, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll wait to see how your fix comes out, but at the moment, anyone looking at this will find only four schools in a nation of nearly 50,000,000 people. You might find the listing of schools to be as daunting a task as the article's creator did.  Nevertheless, if this expands to at least 100 names, I'd change my vote.  Mandsford (talk) 00:30, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't have any particular intention of listing all the schools; someone interested in Korean schools can do that. WP:NOTIMELIMIT is just an essay and not a guideline, but it seems germane here. Other, similar, lists can and have been brought into some kind of reasonable shape; so can this one. I've provided some referenced numbers so that at least the article isn't blatantly incorrect anymore, so I'm not sure why we need to remove it. Matt Deres (talk) 02:22, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * And therein lies the problem. Nobody is particularly interested in fixing the list itself.  I appreciate that you've corrected an erroneous statistic, but the article is about a list, rather than about statistics.  I'd rather have no article at all than to have something that reflects badly on Wikipedia.  People click on this to look for a list, and it's a list of four names.  We're only removing this eyesore, but not the topic.  Mandsford (talk) 12:23, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I've said m'piece. I understand your position, but I'd rather have a stub to build on than nothing at all. Given the !votes, I don't doubt this will be garbaged and I won't lose sleep over it, but for the record I don't see what criteria the page currently meets for deletion. Matt Deres (talk) 02:05, 8 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment- Just FYI, creator of this article has left the following comment on my talk page. User_talk:Hitrohit2001. Hitro 13:04, 7 July 2009 (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.