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) Bmusician 03:46, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Natuk Vivekananda Vidyamandir (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced school article. No hints of notability or sources in Latin script available through Google Search. Fails WP:V and WP:GNG. Night of the Big Wind _talk 21:39, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of the oldest school in Ghatal subdivision, ghatal (completed 125 year). also the name of the school is present in the list of WBBSE affiliated schools and WBCHSE affiliated schools. As one of the oldest higher secondary school in Ghatal, I think this article is suitable for wikipedia.--Soumitrahazra (talk) 12:17, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the external links, but the article needs independent third party sources. In effect, websites from the school itself, the WBBSE or the WBCHSE are not sufficient. And the sources must be relevant, not sources that the building served as a polling station or so. In this case very important: Sources don't have to be in English or latin script! Sources in the local language (Bengali?) and script are also sufficient! Happy hunting! Night of the Big Wind _talk 13:17, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The WBBSE and WBCHSE are independent of this school. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:45, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep For confirming the existence of a high school, the local board of education list is entirely sufficient (it is a reliable, third-party source). As High School are taken to be notable by default, the article should therefore be kept. It would, of course, be great if it could be expanded further, but stubs are also part of wikipedia. Francis Bond (talk) 03:26, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Sorry, highschool are not notable by default. Just like every other article they have to satisfy WP:GNG. Night of the Big Wind _talk 05:16, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, no article has to meet WP:GNG. It is a guideline not policy and, as it states, "occasional exceptions may apply". We have plenty of topic specific guidelines that obviate the need to meet WP:GNG and there are a whole bunch of topics that, by consensus, are considered to be notable. TerriersFan (talk) 14:07, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:23, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:24, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - consensus is that high schools are notable because experience shows that, with sufficient research, sufficient sources can be found to meet WP:ORG. In the case of Indian high schools, little material is put on the Internet, so to avoid systemic bias time should be given to find local sources. TerriersFan (talk) 16:41, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Secondary schools are generally considered to be notable. Nominating secondary school articles for deletion is generally a waste of time since the same arguments will be trotted out on both sides and the article will end up being kept anyway. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:31, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Luckily, "an AfD is a waste of time" is not an argument when the closing admin has to decide about keep or remove. I hope that admin looks at the merits and sources of the article en realizes that much heralded "consensus" is in fact rather shaky. Night of the Big Wind _talk 17:46, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Luckily, "it's not notable because I say it's not and if I disagree with a consensus I'll claim it isn't really a consensus" is not a valid argument either! -- Necrothesp (talk) 19:49, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per the persistent, solid, non-shaky consensus over the last few years that verified high schools are suitable topics for Wikipedia articles. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:45, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Solid, non-shaky? Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Secondary schools should meet WP:GNG or are they exempt? tells another story... Night of the Big Wind _talk 01:02, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• It seems to me that all polls in that discussion did not meet WP:CONS. Are you claiming that consensus was met? I think consensus is required to overturn eight years of precedent.-- Sailing to Byzantium _(msg), 01:46, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. WP:OUTCOMES#Schools is clear on this issue: "most independently accredited degree-awarding institutions and high schools are being kept except when zero independent sources can be found to prove that the institution actually exists." -- Sailing to Byzantium _(msg), 00:57, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.