Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mount Star Secondary 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. Secondary schools are kept per WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES, As Kudpung notes sources for BLPs, Films, Schools etc etc in developing countries are alot harder to find than in for instance the UK or US which is why 9 times out of 10 leniency is given. (non-admin closure) – Davey 2010 Talk 18:34, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Mount Star Secondary School

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unsourced article. Previous PROD tags removed by author/sockpuppet. No reliable sources found. Bazj (talk) 07:52, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 13:39, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 13:39, 19 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete unless some proof is uncovered as to its official existence. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:59, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep per precedent for high schools as documented in OUTCOMES. The photo is ample proof that it exists and we should not expect the same quality of sources from Nepal that we would expect from the US or the UK. Perhaps has never visited or worked in a developing country.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:44, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
 * , You mean the photo that wasn't there when the article was nominated for deletion? The photo uploaded by a sockpuppet operated by the same master as the puppet who created the article? The guy who keeps adding vanity crud to the article?
 * I may not expect the same quality of sources from developing countries, but I do expect the same application of rules on vandalism and sockpuppetry. Bazj (talk) 14:58, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
 * If you are going to make claims of vandalism and sockpuppetry please substantiate them and take them to the appropriate noticeboards. It is permitted to edit and add content to articles while they are under discussion. We have here an article about a secondary school that is proven to exist (many schools in developing countries look like the one in the photo). The comments in your post above are not reasons for deletion. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:13, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete Neutral because A) either 1) the school is not accredited (I can has proof of accreditation? No, a photo doesn't count), 2) the school does not grant diplomas that serve the same role as a "high school diploma" does in the United States, or 3) unlike most US high schools and their international counterparts, the school does not have sufficient media coverage to meet WP:GNG or WP:ORG.  #3 is the key: Even accredited, diploma-granting high schools in the US sometimes get deleted at WP:AFD if a diligent search for coverage turns up nothing more than a mere proof of existence and routine government documents.  Also delete because B) even if sources are found, this sockpuppet's presence has "poisoned the well" and a judicious application of WP:Blow it up and start over and (because TNT is not normally used for "non-hopeless" articles) a judicious dose of WP:Ignore all rules would serve Wikipedia better than leaving the page as-is.  If the article is substantially improved and referenced before this AFD closes I may change my recommendation, but for now, delete.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  23:35, 24 August 2015 (UTC) I've been out of touch on the school WP:OUTCOMES.  "Back in the day" high schools which had zero press coverage other than proof of existence and pro-forma documentation such as government reports occasionally fell at AFD.  In the United States this usually meant "alternative schools" with no sports teams and nothing else that got them any press coverage.  I see things have changed in the past few years and articles about such schools would almost certainly be kept.  I'm neutral because I haven't had time to dig into this enough to be convinced that it's the equivalent of a government or accredited private school.  That's not the article's fault, it's my lack of time to devote to the subject.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  03:17, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment As with any AFD on a topic that might meet Wikipedia's notability requirements, the best outcome is to find reliable sources that demonstrate that the subjects meets WP:Notability, then rewrite the article so there is no longer any question about it. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  23:35, 24 August 2015 (UTC) preceeding sig added after-the-fact at 03:19, 26 August 2015 (UTC) by davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)
 * Keep  1)Accreditation is irrelevant, it's existence that matters. 2) A secondary education is one at the level which prepares for college, that it might not give a diploma is irrelevan, and that the people may anot actually go to college is irrelevant. 10th grade is the usual high school completion grade in India and in that region generally. . 3) No secondary school school with a real existence has ever been deleted at afd for lack of notability  in the last 5 years, except for special cases such as virtual schools with only dubious existence, or small home schools,  4) TNT is used for articles where the subject is notable but the article hopeless and unfixable--here the situation is that the person who wrote this also included information about himself, but that can be removed. 5) We are very flexible with sources for this area to avoid cultural bias.  DGG ( talk ) 12:49, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:51, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep as a secondary school per longstanding precedent and consensus. The photo suggests it does exist, although I acknowledge it has been added since the nomination. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:50, 26 August 2015 (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.