Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Watling Academy


 * 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 delete. If anyone is interested in working on this in draftspace, I will be happy to provide a copy. Vanamonde (Talk) 11:37, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Watling Academy

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

Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NORG. Sources are all routine local coverage for a secondary school. MB 00:56, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and England. MB 00:56, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:52, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete per nom. Sources are unlikely to exist for a school that has only existed for two years. Scorpions13256 (talk) 11:58, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep This school is on target to have 1,700 pupils within four years and become the largest in the Borough of Milton Keynes. While it may well be true that it does not quite meet GNG today, there can be no doubt that it will become so. The nomination is precipitate. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 22:54, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment - the above is such a common fallacious argument that we have an essay to respond to it - TOOSOON. 174.212.212.53 (talk) 23:23, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep independently sourced, clearly a significant institution within the Milton Keynes area. This reductionist attitude only serves to diminish Wikipedia, not expand it...Bleaney (talk) 20:00, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Currently, except for the one MKFM source that could easily be replaced sometime in the future, there are nearly as many reliable sources as in the articles for The Radcliffe School and Ousedale School (two other local schools), and the missing objectives of the WP:GNG will almost certainly be fulfilled, and is likely to be soon due to the fact that 2 years have already passed, and the population of this area of MK is growing rapidly, and we should expect the school to follow suit. For the reasons above, and for consistency with secondary schools across the Borough of Milton Keynes, IMO there is absolutely no practical reason as to why this article should be removed now, only for it likely to be reinstated in the near or not-to-distant future, and as others have mentioned, removing this article from Wikipedia will do nothing but remove potentially useful information (however small it may be for a time), and so it defeats the purpose of this platform which is, per WP:About, a source of information on all branches of knowledge. Anonymous MK2006 (talk) 20:02, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Enough sourcing to meet WP:GNG. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:28, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak delete Referring to the state of other articles is not a valid reason to keep as WP:OTHERSTUFF exists. No matter how likely something is doesn't mean it's not WP:TOOSOON as per WP:CRYSTAL. -Kj cheetham (talk) 16:27, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - The sources in this article don't seem to satisfy WP:GNG or WP:NORG to establish the notability of the school at this time. (Note that the future potential notability of the school is irrelevant in determining whether this article should exist today. If the school becomes notable in the future, the article can be easily restored.) Per WP:AUD (a sub-section on WP:NORG), "attention solely from local media, or media of limited interest and circulation, is not an indication of notability; at least one regional, statewide, provincial, national, or international source is necessary." That requirement has clearly not been satisifed here. Of the three sources in the article currently:
 * Relatively significant coverage of the school, but in a very local publication. Additionally, this reads like a press release that was probably prepared by the Milton Keynes Council. You can find very similar press releases published in other places about other schools in the area that were built by Milton Keynes Council over the years, like these: . Note the same structure in each article, with extended quotes by various staff, followed by the same tag-line at the end of each article: "Milton Keynes Council has committed to ensuring there is a good school place ready for every child."
 * Another press release published on the website of a local radio station. The same extended quote structure has been employed.
 * Broken link to a page on www.milton-keynes.gov.uk. It doesn't matter what the link was, because it would have been a primary source anyway, which is ineligible to be used for the purposes of establishing notability.
 *  —&#8288;Scotty Wong &#8288;— 23:50, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SpinningSpark 15:00, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - based on above policy arguments and source review. This is basically a brand new high school in England. No inherent notability based on policy, taking into consideration the school's size and enrollment, so we have to look at the sources. analyzed the current sourcing and showed it to be lacking in volume and scope. I did a quick Google search to try to supplement the current sources and could find little of import. To salvage some of this info, I just added a line to the schools section in Milton Keynes saying Watling Academy, completed in 2021, is the largest secondary school in Milton Keynes., using this [] to source it.  TimTempleton (talk)  (cont)  22:04, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment - my edit was just reverted because the only source I could find spoke of the future, and not the present. <b style="color:#7F007F">TimTempleton</b> <sup style="color:#800080">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  22:18, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 * DRAFTIFY as a compromise. Not notable per WP:NSCHOOL, could become in the future. >> Lil-unique1  (  talk  ) — 23:00, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Draftify is just kicking the can down the road. If it's not notable it should be deleted and can be recovered by an admin if need be. Unattended drafts get deleted after 6 months anyway. -Kj cheetham (talk) 16:58, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete As per source analysis by ScottyWong⁠. MrsSnoozyTurtle 00:33, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete All of the citations in the article are just routine news from local sources. Sean Brunnock (talk) 14:06, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Modussiccandi (talk) 11:07, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Draftify as suggested, seems a good compromise. I don't find much for notability, but it could happen soon enough. Oaktree b (talk) 20:15, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Draftify seems reasonable. It's not worth trying to summarise data when there's only one data-source to summarise (all the existing citations obviously come from the same press release) - our readers might just as well read the original. Nothing to write about now, but it will probably become notable in the future. Elemimele (talk) 14:02, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:GNG or WP:NORG at the moment. Maybe somewhere in the future but now it is just routine covering. Being new or existing does not make a school notable The Banner  <i style="color:maroon">talk</i> 18:36, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Even though WP:ORG says at the very top of the guideline, The scope of this guideline covers all groups of people organized together for a purpose with the exception of non-profit educational institutions, (italics mine) the article still needs to meet GNG. The GNG guideline, WP:SUSTAINED, says "Notable topics have attracted attention over a sufficiently significant period of time." Even after I added a few facts and sources, I don't find the sustained criterion to be met, and it's a case of WP:TOOSOON. — Grand&#39;mere Eugene (talk) 19:03, 16 August 2022 (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.