Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Newport Free Grammar 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 per WP:SNOW. Non-admin closure. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 23:01, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Newport Free Grammar School

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

Doesn't appear to meet the requirements in WP:ORG - certainly doesn't assert its notability as is the general rule. A speedy-tag was contested. —TreasuryTag —t —c 16:51, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - From WP:ORG "An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources", , , , , , ... from a quick google search. The article needs work but should not be deleted. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 17:17, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair enough; my complaint was that it didn't assert its notability as is required. Note that your fifth link isn't actually any good, since it's a government department that lists data on all schools iirc. —TreasuryTag —t —c 17:19, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, none of those links are reliable.  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 20:00, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Of course they are - the first link, for example, is a University which is obviously notable. TerriersFan (talk) 22:33, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * So a government department that lists all data on schools isn't reliable? Theresa Knott | The otter sank 20:19, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Pretty much. In and of itself, it isn't notable. Fleeting mentions or listings in independent sources isn't enough.  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 21:01, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Founded in 1588 - obviously notable. Colonel Warden (talk) 17:39, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I see - what's the cut-off date for notability by age, then? 1589? 1703? 2006? It's a bizarre idea to suggest that age makes something notable; my grandparents aren't notable, nor is my family by virtue of the fact that it was "founded" even before that school... —TreasuryTag —t —c 17:45, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Age does tend to make things notable; on one hand, old things tend to have a long time to have things written about them, and on the other hand people are interested in the things that survive an exceptionally long time. If your grandparents were still around after more than 120 years, they would be notable. But there's certainly no magic cut-off line for everything, and even for narrow subjects it's usually easier to take on a case by case basis rather than create an arbitrary line.--Prosfilaes (talk) 18:25, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep; it's verifiable and the age makes it notable.--Prosfilaes (talk) 18:25, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per Theresa. Remember that an article need not explicitly say, "So and so is notable because..." Indeed, it shouldn't say that; that would be considered peacock language. Zagalejo^^^ 18:46, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.   --  Double Blue  (Talk) 18:56, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep 420 year-old school, bound to have some sources; GoogleBooks and GoogleNews shows promise. Double Blue  (Talk) 19:05, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per googlenews.  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 20:01, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong keep - the nominator says "A speedy-tag was contested." A high school founded in 1588 is not notable? Sheesh! TerriersFan (talk) 22:15, 9 March 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.