Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Punggol 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   merge to Punggol. Stifle (talk) 09:04, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Punggol Primary School

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Non-notable primary school, no claims of notability. Woogee (talk) 07:28, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete This can be mentioned in Punggol Secondary School or in Punggol, per our usual practice. I don't see any reason for a redirect or a merge.  Contrary to popular belief, redirects are not cheap. Mandsford (talk) 15:44, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:01, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:01, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect to Punggol per usual practice. Absolutely no need to delete. Firstly this is a useful redirect; secondly if any content is to be merged then for GFDL reasons the page cannot be deleted and, finally, deleting a page takes more server load than converting it into a redirect. TerriersFan (talk) 19:08, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Why not just say keep, since a redirect accomplishes the same thing? I'll confess that I have no knowledge of relative server load usages, although it sounds similar to the "you use more electricity turning on a light than you do if you leave it on".  What I do know is that a redirect takes up the same amount of space as a keep, as is evident when looking at the history of a redirect, so it would make just as much sense to keep all articles about primary schools.  The only differences between a redirect and a keep are that (a) it takes slightly more effort for the person to find the text in a redirect and (b) Punggolian youngsters won't be able to make a class project out of updating the article.  Mandsford (talk) 16:42, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Simply because the Community distinguishes between standalone pages and incorporation in a larger article. Notability guidelines apply to the former but not the latter. A curious anomaly, I know, but there you are :-) As a matter of routine, location articles mention places - libraries, parks, buildings etc that are not separately notable. TerriersFan (talk) 18:03, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  00:23, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete -- no notability demonstrated in a reliable secondary source. N2e (talk) 02:49, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect to Punggol per precedent. Notability is not required to merge a school into a parent article. The information is verified by this Singapore government directory and the school's website. Cunard (talk) 07:13, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect per abundant precedent. Article doesn't posit importance more than any other similar school, and it doesn't demonstrate any notability comparable to that of any higher level school. B.Wind (talk) 02:28, 12 April 2010 (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.