Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St Pauls Crompton Street


 * 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   redirect to Walkden. Tone 19:52, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

St Pauls Crompton Street

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

Non-notable primary school with no importance asserted. Prod was removed without comment.  Majorly  talk  22:53, 26 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep One of a series of articles nominated together without due process. I shall improve this too when time permits.  See also Articles for deletion/Greenhill Primary School. Colonel Warden (talk) 23:53, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note The statement "One of a series of articles nominated together without due process" is completely false. I properly checked every single article I nominated.  Majorly  talk  23:57, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Taking this case for another example, you neither engaged in discussion at the article's talk page nor contacted the article's original author. These AFD nominations seem to have been a reflex reaction to removal of the prods.  Tsk. Colonel Warden (talk) 00:05, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Are you deliberately trying to miss the point here, or are you just going to rudely "tsk" at me? Nobody is going to be watching the talk page - look at how many people edited the article. The original creator last edited in 2008. Both of those options are out. I bring it here for discussion amongst more people. I believe it fails WP:N horribly - it asserts no notability whatsoever.  Majorly  talk  00:09, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I have asked members of the Greater Manchester WikiProject to give their opinions here.  Majorly  talk  00:16, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Colonel Warden's keep !vote is lacking a valid rationale, not to mention assuming bad faith. Jeni  ( talk ) 01:51, 27 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 00:32, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 00:32, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete non notable primary school. Jeni  ( talk ) 01:16, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect to Walkden per precedent. There is no reason to delete this content. Cunard (talk) 01:35, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect to Walkden per precedent. WP:Before requires consideration of a merge before deletion. TerriersFan (talk) 01:52, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, no redirect. While secondary schools and school districts are treated as inherently notable, primary schools have to establish notability in the usual way.  When a school within a district does receive significant coverage beyond the local level, then a separate article can be spun out.   Mandsford (talk) 16:35, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete No notability stated. Article could be created again within 5mins where any notability established. Pit-yacker (talk) 17:53, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, no redirect. This one sentence sub-stub could easily be recreated if a case for this school's notability could ever be made, which seems to be rather unlikely. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:06, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect to Walkden until there are sufficient reliable sources for an independent V, NPOV, NOR article. Double Blue  (talk) 09:38, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge as above. Consensus is that primary schools are generally NN. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:59, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect as above. Lack of notability is a reason to deny an institution its own page but not a reason not to merge or redirect. We routinely merge non-notable subjects into broader, more notable, articles and the redirect helps readers find the material. Bridgeplayer (talk) 21:00, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect as above. Mukadderat (talk) 22:37, 31 August 2009 (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.