Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. John's-Kilmarnock School (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:20, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

St. John's-Kilmarnock School
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Last AfD few years ago closed by saying that all high schools are notable per WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. Since then we had an RfC that clarified this. We need to show this passes WP:NCOMPANY/WP:GNG. And so far, the article fails at this, badly, and I don't see much else in my WP:BEFORE. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:09, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  06:09, 22 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. OUTCOMES is neither a policy nor a guideline, it's simply a documentation of what usually takes place and is furthermore confirmed by tacit consensus through 1,000s of school AfD closures. The cited RfC  actually had no clear consensus - it's mainly interpreted by peope who want to read out of it what they 'like' - mainbly deletionists. The RfC aolso inferred that  whatever its outcome, it should not be used as an excuse to start tagging existing school articles for deletion. This article already survived one AfD by an overwhelming consensus to that effect so there is no need to revisit it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:56, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. 400 pupil all-through school. 10+ Google pages of references- some primary, but detailed comparison sites such as Our Kids . Its an IB-school so that seals notability. The way forward is to use these references and build up the article.ClemRutter (talk) 07:46, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep per above. tedder (talk) 09:33, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 23:37, 26 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep I've added a few sources, documenting the school's enabling legislation in 1972 and its accreditation status. Meets WP:GNG and WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. — Grand&#39;mere Eugene (talk) 19:50, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep per Kudpung and passes WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 02:08, 29 October 2019 (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.