Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Little angels 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. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:38, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Little angels school

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

School of questionable notability (asserted but not supported with citations) and questionable verifiability. Declined speedy delete, as CSD A7 does not apply to schools. A More Perfect Onion (talk) 14:07, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - article has been substantially rewritten to an encyclopediac format and is supported by proper references. --A More Perfect Onion (talk) 12:37, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete unverifiable spam Hipocrite (talk) 14:10, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I have made a brief search and have not found any independent coverage at all. If they do exist the onus is on those wishing to keep the article to provide citations. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:04, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - I did a brief Google search also. The results that I skimmed included the school's own web site (which I duly added) and several non-RS sites -- I think Classmates.com was one of them.  Hence the AFD on questionable verifiability. --A More Perfect Onion (talk) 16:24, 18 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  --  I 'mperator 14:19, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Despite the name, this is a large institution that includes high school and what looks like lower-level university classes. High schools are rightly or wrongly considered inherently notable.  The primary issue is verification but primary sources can be used as sources in articles and there may be material in other languages. Drawn Some (talk) 17:57, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * What source leads you to believe the institution exists? Hipocrite (talk) 17:58, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Google search for ("little angels school" + lalitpur) reveals many reliable sources with trivial mentions. No doubt of the existence. Drawn Some (talk) 18:45, 18 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong keep with total rewrite. The British Council says you can do GCEs there at this page (html version of a doc) so I imagine it does exist and is at high school level. I'll rewrite and watch it once the AfD closes unless anyone who knows anything about the place wants to. Blue Square Thing (talk) 18:59, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep obviously. First of all there are plenty of sources to stand up verifiability, this and this for example. Secondly not only does this school educate at secondary level but at post-secondary which is a clear claim for notability. We should also be aware of systemic bias. TerriersFan (talk) 19:20, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Drawn Some says "High schools are rightly or wrongly considered inherently notable." Considered by whom? Not by all Wikipedians. And saying "rightly or wrongly" concedes that it may be wrong. Then from Blue Square Thing we have "The British Council says you can do GCEs there". So what? There are thousands of schools where you can do GCEs. In any case I do not see how taking a particular type of exam relates at all to the Wikipedia notability policy; the essential criterion is significant coverage by reliable independent sources, and nobody has demonstrated that. Even Drawn Some, who favours keeping the article, refers to "many reliable sources with trivial mentions", which does not suggest substantial coverage, and what is more he doesn't even give citations for those "trivial" mentions, but merely asserts that they exist. Finally, TerriersFan says that there are "plenty of sources to stand up verifiability", and links to two of them. The first source linked merely mentions briefly that a person covered in the source made a speech at the school. I suppose TerriersFan does not intend this as irony, but I am bewildered how anyone can regard this as substantial coverage of the school. The second one gives a 3 sentence press release from the school which announces that the school is going to give a course on meditation. This is neither substantial nor independent coverage. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:38, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Whoah, I gave a link to a search result with MANY trivial mentions in reliable resources to support the existence of the school. My personal belief that all high schools should NOT be considered notable without consideration of their merits is totally irrelevant as it is community consensus that they ARE notable.  Has anyone even checked for sources in other languages, say in Nepali, which would be the obvious first choice?  I would find it hard to believe that there are no articles in papers in Nepali about a school with 4,000 students.  And I suspect that if this were a British or Australian or U.S. or Canadian school and didn't have such a nursery-school name that it wouldn't even be listed here for deletion and that no one would be saying delete if it were. As the nominator points out, he wasn't sure. Editors should be open to changing their opinions in these discussions as new evidence or information is brought into the matter. Drawn Some (talk) 20:03, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I am not convinced that it is community consensus that all high schools are notable. There has been a good deal of argument about this, and it is by no means clear to me that consensus has emerged from that argument. What has emerged is a sort of resignation to the fact that those who take this view will usually have their way. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:33, 19 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep as it prepares for the GCE, its a secondary school. all secondary schools are notable. We so far have concluded this by consensus at literally all verifiable high schools for the last 18 months. That a few people keep objecting to it is the reason why there is no guideline--as we presently work, a few people can do that on formal policy questions.Fortunately, we can form consensus by consistent practice at AfD. Incidentally, even if we did not so consider them, I would certainly consider this one, as a major HS for its area with connections to a national university. the reason we have the rule is to keep from arguing each individual HS. We are already facing 40,000 international relations AfD debates. We could potentially have about many times that number in high schools. In order to remove a few possibly non notable articles, it just isn't worth it.  we have more important work to do at Afd.  DGG (talk) 22:00, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * DGG, it's only potentially around 20,000 bilateral relations articles, (200x200)/2, because you don't pair France - Germany and then Germany - France again. Drawn Some (talk) 22:22, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, it looks as though the "all schools are notable" line will win as usual, and perhaps in the case of this school that will be the right result. However, I am still not convinced that a notable school should not be able to show some sort of independent coverage, however minimal. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:38, 19 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Here are some additional resources including a very interesting in-depth interview with the founder regarding proposed nationalization of private schools by Maoists.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&num=100&q=%22little+angels%27+school%22+site%3Akantipuronline.com&btnG=Search especially http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=103430

Please remember that this school is in Nepal where less than 20% of the population is urbanized and the annual per capita GDP is US$1,100. The school has 700 teachers and 6,000 students. Drawn Some (talk) 17:18, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Also, the best general search is ("little angels school" + katmandhu or katmandu) because Lalitpur is a district in the Katmandhu metropolitan area. That yields well over 1,000 hits. Drawn Some (talk) 17:24, 19 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep There is now ample evidence that the school is notable. (This AfD proposal has resulted in work being done which has produced evidence of notability. I still think, as I said above, that notable schools will have evidence of notability, so that a special "schools don't need evidence" rule is completely unnecessary.) JamesBWatson (talk) 20:15, 19 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment I have done a bit of clean-up and added some references. Drawn Some (talk) 03:03, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. Seems to be a major school over there, and we should avoid the systemic bias of regarding things as non-notable that would be notable if they were in a Western industrialized country. *Dan T.* (talk) 15:26, 23 May 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.