Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maisondieu Primary 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  Redirect to Brechin. (non-admin close) RMHED (talk) 15:30, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Maisondieu Primary School

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

Contested prod. Non-notable primary school, unreferenced - fails WP:VER. My motive in bringing this AfD is that most of the numerous, proliferating and utterly pointless articles about non-notable schools don't cite any references, but because they're schools we turn a blind eye. Like any other article they should be properly referenced e.g. link to school website or education authority. What do other editors think about this? Sorry about the rant! andy (talk) 09:20, 29 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete As not notable.  WP:WPSCH suggests that primary schools are not, in themselves, notable.  This article makes no effort to say why this particular school is notable.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dpmuk (talk • contribs) 10:04, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.   --  Beloved  Freak  11:03, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Brechin. There must be some effort to show notab, none has been shown. WP is not a directory of transient information of who's running a school.--Triwbe (talk) 12:42, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Delete Delete 00:22, 30 June 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (talk • contribs)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  22:12, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Brechin per numerous precedents. TerriersFan (talk) 21:37, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect as per Triwbe and TerriersFan as a topic notable within its parent. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:19, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * What does "a topic notable within its parent" mean? It sounds like anything related to a notable topic automatically becomes notable, which is contrary to WP:N - notability cannot be conferred. andy (talk) 21:32, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry if I was unclear: a little too much shorthand, probably. A topic is notable within its parent—the header topic (a term that's stuck with me from Summary style)—when it is of importance enough to discuss. WP:N regulates whether a topic is notable enough to stand alone, but it also addresses notability within the article in one specific sense, in its consideration of ""undue weight". (Not to be confused with WP:UNDUE, which is a subtopic of WP:NPOV.) Specifically, it says, "An article should not give undue weight to any aspects of the subject, but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to its significance to the subject." I agree that the subject does not seem currently notable enough for a stand-alone article, but it is of sufficient notability within the topic for inclusion there, and it is an appropriate handling according to policy mandate to preserve information where possible. My opinion would probably be very different if we were discussing, say, a specific McDonald's. :) In that case, barring extraordinary circumstances, I'd likely feel that the topic isn't notable within the parent. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:48, 3 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Brechin per above comments. Ben MacDuiTalk /  Walk  14:07, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect The other editors said it best...and earlier. Ecoleetage (talk) 17:52, 3 July 2008 (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.