Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Specialist school

Specialist 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 speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) ThatRandomGuy1 (talk) 20:42, 15 January 2022 (UTC)


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

An IP user added a PROD tag to the article. I myself do not want to have the article deleted but they do. Therefore, I replaced the PROD with an AfD nomination as PRODs are for non-contested/controversial deletions. Am I not supposed to do this? If not, how do I resolve the issue? ThatRandomGuy1 (talk) 22:15, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2022 January 13.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 22:30, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:31, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:31, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:31, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - if my reading of Talk:Specialist school is correct, this is more of a content dispute than an argument for outright deletion. I don't believe that this article is redundant next to Specialist schools programme, they cover different aspects. At the absolute bare minimum, some sort of WP:ATD should be brought to the table as 'specialist school' is definitely a search term and a likely one. COI: I've taught in a specialist school for most of my adult life. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:35, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Procedural keep No explanation from the nominator as to why the article should be deleted outside boilerplate; please present a reason for deletion. Also going by the article history, it seems there's ownership issues as nominator is also the article creator (not in authorship, but converting from a redirect to article), and using the AfD process to end challenges about their contributed content, which is disallowed.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 23:36, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * This doesn't add anything to why you want your own article deleted. The IP cannot initiate an AfD discussion, so putting it up for deletion yourself is questionable. Do you find your own content to be non-notable? Or are edits from the IP challenging your content something you're discouraging?  Nate  • ( chatter ) 00:45, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Procedural keep As far as I can tell the article is extremely well referenced. Especially for articles about this kind of topic. I can understand why the nominator nominated it though. Since AfD is normally sort of the next step in the process after a PROD is removed. At least there isn't any question about it's notability now and no one will try and nominate it later. At least hopefully not. --Adamant1 (talk) 02:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep, this seems to be a content dispute that has spilled over into AfD. There does not seem to be a valid reason for this article to be deleted. SailingInABathTub (talk) 12:36, 14 January 2022 (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.