Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Xavier's Higher Secondary School, Thoothukudi


 * 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. ansh 666 20:25, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

St. Xavier's Higher Secondary School, Thoothukudi

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG The Banner talk 08:04, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 10:29, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 10:29, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 10:29, 12 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete lacks the independent, reliable sources required to establish notability.96.127.242.226 (talk) 18:44, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Most schools this age are notable and it is easy to find sources to demononstatre WP:NORG. This school is an exception. I was unable to find good sources in either English or Tamil. The Tamil article has a few more sources, but they appear weak via machine translation. I suspect that there are offline Tamil language sources that would demonstrate notability, but until such sources are located, this article should be deleted.  — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 22:52, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment I've also been having trouble finding sources, at least any that do not appear to be Wikipedia mirrors, or just mentions in passing in non-reliable sources. I can't even verify that the school is still open, and the school's web page is dead. Note that anyone looking for sources should also try searching using  with the English place name "Tuticorin" not just with "Thoothukudi". I'll hold off !voting to see if anyone had more luck finding sources than I did. Meters (talk) 23:47, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * They have a Facebook page with a recent post, so I imagine they are still open. RS are another issue.96.127.242.226 (talk) 04:40, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
 * This might be used to confirm its existence, though no date is given here. Jzsj (talk) 18:03, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Just existing is not good enough any more. The notability has to be proven. The Banner talk 18:36, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying they are closed, or that if they were open it would be sufficient, just that I can't even verify that they are still open. I wouldn't accept the school listing page as proof. Looking at the directory information http://www.southindiaonline.com/tamilnadu/tuticorin/ I can see that the page has not been updated since 10 December 2010. As for the Facebook page, it does not appear to be an official school page, but rather an alumni page. It has only had five posts since 2014: a group photo from 2009; a spam request for a kidney; some undated building photos; a job posting, and not one that would be useful to a new graduate; and some memorabilia from more than 25 years ago. This is typical of the type of traffic on alumni sites, and is certainly not evidence that the school is open.  Meters (talk) 18:41, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Doesn't "once notable, always notable" apply here? In that case, whether they are open now or not would not matter.96.127.242.226 (talk) 22:02, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Please read what I said. I didn't say that it should be deleted because it is not open, or for any other reason. I reserved comment on that. We're having trouble showing notability, and I merely pointed out that the sources are so weak that I can't even tell if it is still open. I asked for help finding sources on the school. So far no-one has provided anything usable. If you found something better than the almost dead alumni Facebook page you gave us then please provide it. Meters (talk) 01:49, 18 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails WP:GNG Snowycats (talk) 16:29, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep It is the oldest school in Thoothukudi and one of the oldest in founded in 1884 the 2 book references states it origin dates back to 1600 during the Portuguese period .Most of the references are  in Tamil Language and many references refer to the place by the name Tuticorin .The Hindu briefly mentions it here   Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 06:56, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Indeed, just a passing mention in The Hindu. The Banner talk 10:33, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The References establish that the school has existed since 1884 and is the oldest in Tuticorin.It can be expanded by adding Tamil language non online references by WP:NEXIST .It has a  Tamil Wikipedia article Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 21:04, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, a reliable source that the school has been around since 1884 would go a long way to showing notability. Unfortunately, that claim may not to be correct. The cited source is dead, and  while this ref mentions the school and 1884 the context is actually in reference to different school which moved in 1884, and later ran into enrollment problems because of competition from St Xavier and others..
 * So there's a Tamil Wikipedia article. That's nice. It does not make the subject notable, and more than the Tamil editors arguing that the existence of an English Wikipedia article shows the notability of the subject for inclusion in the Tamil Wikipedia would. The contents of the Tamil article also do not help. It is nothing but a translation of the English Wikipedia article from June 2017. Before I realized that I started to check the refs that are in the Tamil article that are not in this article, and the first one I tried was a piece of malware infested crap.  Meters (talk)19:33, 29 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep - We keep high schools because experience shows that, with enough research, sources can almost invariably be found that meet WP:ORG. English Google is a poor tool for finding sources on schools in the Indian sub-continent. Very few have much of an Internet presence. We need to avoid systemic bias and allow time for local hard-copy and local language sources to be investigated. Several sources have already been found which is a good start. Just Chilling (talk) 21:14, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, one passing mention and two book covers. Systematic bias in this case is the deliberate lowering of notability standards to find an excuse to keep the article. The Banner talk 21:43, 18 July 2018 (UTC) And the same happens with others schools on other continents

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. Thanks for the significant reference that traces the origins of the school to 1600. It is notable for its historical roots as "the oldest eductional institution in Thoothukudi". Jzsj (talk) 02:03, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   06:54, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per above source. + The Nom is entirely basing his opinion on English language sources. While the regional language is Tamil. -- D Big X ray  20:23, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I assume that you have reliable sources in the Tamil language to add to the article? <span style="font-family:'Old English Text MT',serif;color:green">The Banner <i style="color:maroon">talk</i> 20:47, 27 July 2018 (UTC)


 * School's in forever. These attempts to delete articles about schools are both sad and hilarious. No school is ever deleted, except by mistake. Most school AfDs come to the attention of schooligans and then the article stays as long as the school merely exists! -The Gnome (talk) 07:59, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
 * These attempts to keeps schools without satisfying the notability guidelines is equally sad and hilarious. And you know quite well that schools are deleted due to lack of notability and not by mistake. <span style="font-family:'Old English Text MT',serif;color:green">The Banner <i style="color:maroon">talk</i> 08:10, 28 July 2018 (UTC)


 * What you were doing, The Gnome, was nothing more than singing the already shot down song of SCHOOLOUTCOMEs that schools are kept because school articles were kept in the past because school articles were kept in the past because school articles were kept in the past because school articles were kept in the past because school articles were kept in the past because school articles were kept in the past because school articles were kept in the past etc. Without any foundation in policies or guidelines. <span style="font-family:'Old English Text MT',serif;color:green">The Banner <i style="color:maroon">talk</i> 08:16, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Greetings. As it happens, I do not subscribe to the current practice of never deleting school articles and that should be obvious given my proposal over at the Notability talk page. The link's up in bold. I make similar sarcastic comments in most school article AfDs. It's just a let out. We merrily violate policy ("shot down"?! nope!) but one lone editor cannot do more than have some lame fun. Take care. -The Gnome (talk) 16:48, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Well said.These AfDs are becoming typical drama-fests.Same faces on same sides, each aided by their own rhetoric. &#x222F; <b style="color:#070">WBG</b> converse 03:59, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * And because I'm tired of the charade I react with humor (call it irony, 'sokay). See, for instance, one more example further below of the cyclical reasoning prevalent in school AfDs: "Keep. We generally keep such schools according to long standing precedent." In other words, keep that because we keep that. Penrose stairs! -The Gnome (talk) 06:43, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Ha! :) I, (in my early days at School AfDs), had the misfortune to be indulged into trying some reasoning with the most vocal proponent(s) behind omni-keeping of schools but once one of them argued around the rough lines of Since we are keeping all football players, who have played just one match, we will be keeping schools, at an equivalent rate., I was in sufficient senses to pull myself out. &#x222F; <b style="color:#070">WBG</b> converse 10:37, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Yep, I have heard the comment about a school without sources along this line: If you can not find sources, you did not search hard enough. Every trick in the book is used to avoid the question of notability. <span style="font-family:'Old English Text MT',serif;color:green">The Banner <i style="color:maroon">talk</i> 14:29, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Consensus is not evident, given that comments from editors post the previous re-list (with due respect to them) lack both policy and guideline basis

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Lourdes  08:06, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment. One reads at WP:WHYN: "We require the existence of at least one secondary source so that the article can comply with the Wikipedia: No original research requirement that all articles be based on secondary sources." Beyond that the burden of proof is on those challenging the reliability of a school's website, and the websites of other organizations. Is the matter falsely promotional, or is it factual so as not to mislead those who need to know about the school? There would be consequences for any school that is promoted through lies, and the burden of proof is on those who claim that the information given is not reliable. Jzsj (talk) 09:54, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Cherry picking the luxe...
 * Editors apply notability standards to all subjects to determine whether the English language Wikipedia should have a separate, stand-alone article on that subject. The primary purpose of these standards is to ensure that editors create articles that comply with major content policies.


 * We require "significant coverage" in reliable sources so that we can actually write a whole article, rather than half a paragraph or a definition of that topic. If only a few sentences could be written and supported by sources about the subject, that subject does not qualify for a separate page, but should instead be merged into an article about a larger topic or relevant list. (See the advice below.)
 * We require the existence of "reliable sources" so that we can be confident that we're not passing along random gossip, perpetuating hoaxes, or posting indiscriminate collections of information.
 * We require that all articles rely primarily on "third-party" or "independent sources" so that we can write a fair and balanced article that complies with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and to ensure that articles are not advertising a product, service, or organization.
 * We require the existence of at least one secondary source so that the article can comply with No original research's requirement that all articles be based on secondary sources.
 * We require multiple sources so that we can write a reasonably balanced article that complies with Neutral point of view, rather than representing only one author's point of view. This is also why multiple publications by the same person or organization are considered to be a single source for the purpose of complying with the "multiple" requirement.
 * We require editors to use their judgment about how to organize subjects so that we have neither long, bloated articles nor articles so narrow that they cannot be properly developed. Editors may decide that it is better for readers to present a narrow subject as part of a broader one.  For example, editors normally prefer to merge information about translations of books into the larger subject of the original book, because in their editorial judgment, the merged article is more informative and more balanced for readers and reduces redundant information in the encyclopedia. (For ideas on how to deal with material that may be best handled by placing it in another article, see WP:FAILN.)
 * Do not forget the rest of WP:WHYN, Jzsj. Not every Jesuit-started organisation is automatically notable. <span style="font-family:'Old English Text MT',serif;color:green">The Banner <i style="color:maroon">talk</i> 16:39, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
 * No need for such cynical remarks. I have suggested that reviewers take more responsibility for accepting articles like those on social development organizations. I was misled for years by their accepting articles without even a tag; due to their acceptance of the articles I concluded that one independent source and more than regional reach were sufficient for notability. Jzsj (talk) 16:47, 28 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. We generally keep such schools according to long standing precedent. In any case, if were not to meet that accepted practice, per policy it would be redirected and not deleted. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:13, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * That precedent is long gone, mr. Kudpung, and you know that quite well. But it is much easier to hammer on a by now historic precedent that actually adhere to the policies and guidelines. <span style="font-family:'Old English Text MT',serif;color:green">The Banner <i style="color:maroon">talk</i> 08:36, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * That precedent  has not  changed one iota, nor has your blatantly obvious serial campaign against school articles. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:19, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * So you still have no policy/guideline-based arguments to show? <span style="font-family:'Old English Text MT',serif;color:green">The Banner <i style="color:maroon">talk</i> 11:49, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Please drop it.None of you are going to convince the other and this back&forth will hardly make a difference to the outcome, whichever way that tilts. &#x222F; <b style="color:#070">WBG</b> converse 13:34, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Avoiding the waste of time is always welcome but I believe demanding to know the policy behind another editor's suggestion is a legitimate query. Even if the question has been asked many times before and if all those times the answer was nowhere to be found. Otherwise, these AfDs truly serve no purpose. No harm in reminding ourselves of the existence of vacuum! -The Gnome (talk) 08:37, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The sad thing is that somebody is already threatening me with blocks because I challenge his non-policy/guideline based views... <span style="font-family:'Old English Text MT',serif;color:green">The Banner <i style="color:maroon">talk</i> 09:54, 31 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Thoothukudi.I fail to crawl any decent source,that accords a significant mention. &#x222F; <b style="color:#070">WBG</b> converse 03:59, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment That is quite expected. You failed to get any "English" Language sources "online". When we should be looking for "Tamil" sources and "offline". I see here a clear disregard for a rather obvious language and regional WP:BIAS. Remember not every country in the world has a habit of putting everything online. Even then there are a few english sources that provide enough info to conclude that it is notable. results, facilities -- D Big X ray  11:43, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * We need significant mentions in RS.No body is doubting the existance of this school.As to offline sources, I've an access to repository of all prominent Indian newspapers, (1960-2012/13), courtesy my university library.As I said at JsJ's t/p a few days back, I did run a search expecting to get non-trivial hits but umm......, nothing much except routine (mentions of results), (bytes by it's successful students) along with others of different schools, (event-listings) and (a few stray incidents). (My quite-below-par knowledge of Tamil might  have affected me but I won't buy that to a great extent)  .I didn't have any feasible method to conduct a search in other offline Tamil sources.If you really have a concrete source (rather than vague hand-wavings), or expect those to be found at possible vernacular newspapers, in some date-range, list them and I will be happy to run a narrowed search, in a few day's time. &#x222F; <b style="color:#070">WBG</b> converse 13:32, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Can you identify the specific database you are referring to? — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 14:50, 2 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep because it's old, large, well-sourced, and unique enough to pass at least 7 out of 10 of my standards for secondary school. Bearian (talk) 16:13, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Your criterion are quite nice and it begs the question:--Which 7?! &#x222F; <b style="color:#070">WBG</b> converse 16:27, 2 August 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.