Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tarini Choudhury Govt. Girls H.S. & M.P. 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Jovanmilic97 (talk) 08:34, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Tarini Choudhury Govt. Girls H.S. & M.P. School

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The page do not qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. There is no notability Vrisle (talk) 21:33, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:24, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:24, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Tacyarg (talk) 19:37, 26 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete - fails GNG currently Spiderone  20:28, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep -- Secondary school + exists = notable. This one has more coverage than many which are kept. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 19:37, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Not every school is notable; please explain how this meets WP:GNG. Also see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS Spiderone  10:52, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Every secondary school is notable whether or not they meet GNG. Please see WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. If your other stuff based argument were accepted by any kind of consensus at AfD these articles would not universally be kept. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 14:10, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
 * WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES is an essay. While secondary schools usually survive AfD, they are not automatic keeps (e.g. Peninsula Christian School).  In the cases of recent AfDs, the secondary schools survived because editors found additional sources. • Gene93k (talk) 16:59, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
 * That's the fallacy of Post hoc ergo propter hoc. In the cases of recent AfDs the secondary schools survived AND editors found additional sources.  It's not possible to deduce from that that the secondary schools survived BECAUSE editors found additional sources.  There's as much evidence for my point of view, which is that secondary schools survived because secondary schools always survive.  Also, my theory is more explanatory than yours as it covers the many, many cases where editors did not find additional sources and the secondary schools survived anyway. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 19:48, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Secondary schools always survive? See Kishorchak Banamali High School (closed as delete 12 November 2018) and Shayama Prasad Shikshayatan High School (closed as merge to locality 13 November 2018).  Notability is not automatic. • Gene93k (talk) 15:10, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * That happened after I made my comment so it's probably attributable to the observer effect. It certainly doesn't support your argument. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 15:40, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Here are a few older ones from this year so it is doubtful that the results had much to do with this nomination or your comment...Articles for deletion/Daneshmand High School, Articles for deletion/Bantul Mahakali High School, Articles for deletion/Honsbridge International School, Articles for deletion/Wenceslao National High School. Admittedly a very large proportion are kept but that is not because of an essay but because of sourcing. i also think that you have quoted the WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES without reading it recently because it states that following the 2017 RFC:

* Secondary schools are not presumed to be notable simply because they exist. * WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES should be added to the Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions, as it is an accurate statement of the results but promotes circular reasoning.
 * --Dom from Paris (talk) 15:50, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * That "Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions" thing is just an essay. It certainly doesn't control anything.  Also, the reason given, that it "promotes" circular reasoning, is only valid if it does in fact promote circular reasoning in a particular instance, which is not the case here.  My reasoning is not circular so there's no reason to avoid the argument, which certainly seems to be confounding you. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 15:52, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

so if I understand rightly, you are using an essay to show that this article should be kept but this same essay says not to use this essay as an argument in a deletion discussion and says that it should be added to another essay as an argument not to use in a deletion discussion but because this second essay is an essay you say that you are going to ignore it...because it's an essay...you are right you have confounded me...I have no idea how to reply to this kind of logic...I feel a little bit like like John Yossarian...Dom from Paris (talk) 19:31, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * But WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES is not an essay. It's an explanatory supplement to a policy.  You're citing an essay to explain why we should ignore an explanatory supplement to a policy.  Does that ease your Garnett-Fleischaker syndrome? 192.160.216.52 (talk) 19:34, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that was a fun RfC. Drmies (talk) 01:06, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah you're right I was fooled by another editor calling it an essay. But that does not negate the fact that it says in black and white that not all secondary schools are presumed notable just because they exist and that it shouldn't be used in a deletion discussion. So when you say Every secondary school is notable whether or not they meet GNG. Please see WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES that means you have either not read it recently or have chosen to ignore the part that you don't like. At the top of the outcomes page it says "Avoid weak or illogical arguments, such as "Notability is only an optional guideline" or "We always keep these articles"." We have 6 exemples of decisions at afd to show that unfortunately this statement If your other stuff based argument were accepted by any kind of consensus at AfD these articles would not universally be kept. is inaccurate. If you wish to maintain your !vote based purely on a supplement that says not to use it in a deletion discussion and suggests that your argument is weak or illogical that's your choice but it will most probably be ignored. If you want to save this article I would suggest looking at the actual sources and if you consider they are OK base your !vote on that otherwise look for more as I have done and you may be more successful than I. Dom from Paris (talk) 10:35, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
 * So basically you're saying that all those secondary school AfDs that were decided as keep were wrongly decided even though they didn't give sources? That seems unnecessarily dismissive of the thoughts of so many experienced editors.  But OK. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 15:00, 19 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete nothing shows that this school still exists (how many students? how many staff?) or was ever sufficiently large to have been considered notable. Just because it is called "secondary school" doesn't make it one. We should not be !voting just on a name but on sources. This source suggests that is more of a primary school than a secondary school and the fact that it does not have dedicated premises but seems to be housed in a social club begs in favour of a disctinct lack of notability. Dom from Paris (talk) 15:18, 14 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. Indian newspapers are notoriously hard to search, and in this case there are variations in name usage as well as in transliteration. As usual, I presume I could find more if I could search in the local language,but even then, relatively few stories are archived online compared to western newspapers. One also has to reckon with less coverage of girls' education than of boys'. (I did a little searching for something on Tarini Charan Choudhury/Choudhary, who appears to have inspired the foundation of many schools, but didn't have any luck.) That said, I did find further sources (as well as additional obituaries of Mamoni Raisom Goswami mentioning her attending the school). It's a school with decades of history that gets mentioned in a number of English-language sources and has at least one notable alumna. Making allowances for the circumstances, including its being a girls' school, I believe we should keep this in the spirit of SCHOOLOUTCOMES as well as WP:WORLDVIEW. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:25, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry but how do you know the school has decades of history? There is one reference from the 50s that it had 1 student. There are no reliable sources to show that the school actually exists after that as a secondary school. The only source I found says it accepts children from the age of 3, is co-ed and it's address is in a social club. This may have nothing whatsoever to do with the the girl's secondary school in the source. There are plenty of very good notable schools in India that have pages. I do not know why you are bringing world view into this. Approximately a third of the articles I have come across on new pages review are from India and Pakistan and most are very thoroughly sourced. Dom from Paris (talk) 19:40, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Because girls' schools are subject to entrenched bias, especially girls' schools in the developing world. It's quite clear from the web pages concerning the school that it is all-ages, including both a kindergarten with aminimum age of three and a high school/secondary school that prepares for state exams; that may be what the alphabet soup after the name means. We also don't know what the "club" is; for all I know it could be a community centre, and some accounts have the school adjacent rather than in it. Maybe the school receives its mail there. Either way, even if they teach classes in the back room of a social club, that doesn't bear on notability. (I've taught at a degree-granting institution that rents space above drug stores for most of its classes. We have an article on it, last time I looked.) Whether the school is still in existence is also immaterial (though it demonstrably existed earlier this decade). One student, fifty students, or 600 students at the outset also doesn't matter. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:54, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I may have missed something as I did not see a reliable source that shows they prepare for state exams. Are they affiliated to a school board and if so which one? One of the sources would not open for me this may be what I am missing. Dom from Paris (talk) 20:07, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
 * For one, see this source I added, some kind of site for info on the city: Secondary Education Board of Assam (already listed unsourced in the infobox) and mentioning entry to years/forms 5–10 and the two Sixth Form years, 11 and 12; it's also called Higher Secondary in some sources (that would be the H.S. in our title). Yngvadottir (talk) 20:28, 15 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep Being an AfD contributor from India, I can probably add some light on these sources. Based on my searches and this Autobiography, I strongly believe The school's name is "Choudhuri", so the current name is good. For some reasons Telegraph while writing about its notable and highly awarded alumni Mamoni Raisom Goswami, calls it "Chandra". This local newspaper calls it "pioneering institution for girl education, the Tarini Choudhary Government Girls Higher Secondary and Multipurpose School". Anyway, based on these sources, I can confirm that this school exists and is reasonably notable and historical school of Guwahati. Please note that all these sources i referred are in English language, while the local language is Assamese. I can safely assume that there are enough Assamese sources that covers the subject satisfying WP:SIGCOV. I cant read Assamese and these English sources are enough for me to vote a keep here. -- D Big X ray ᗙ  21:49, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   12:19, 16 November 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * KEEP We know it likely exists and just about scrapes notability per the above references. FOARP (talk) 12:33, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Lourdes   04:02, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. And ban AFDs about bona fide high schools in general, as a waste of time.  Let it be. --Doncram (talk) 06:19, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. I have added two sources, one of which calls it a "pioneering" school, so I think it is notable. The article on Jupitora Bhuyan says she attended the school, but I haven't added that as I couldn't find a decent reference. Tacyarg (talk) 19:37, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. Sources added since the nomination show the school clears the WP:GNG bar. • Gene93k (talk) 22:45, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep - certainly this article would benefit from substantial expansion. However, based on the sources found, this school meets WP:GNG. Just Chilling (talk) 00:42, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep as WP:GNG has now been satisfied. I want to register that I find it worrying that editors would argue that secondary school AfDs should be banned, however! Cordless Larry (talk) 15:05, 30 November 2018 (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.