- 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 - Nothing needs deleting now that Stalwart111 has massively improved the article (Thanks Stalwart111), and obviously as we all know schools are kept per schooloutcomes. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010Talk 16:47, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Qingdao No.1 International School of Shandong Province (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:ADVERT and is very much promotional, not a notable school either for Wikipedia. May possibly exist on Chinese Wikipedia, but I am not sure. ~~JHUbal27 01:55, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete per G12- End of discussion, so please close it administrators. Thank you. ~~JHUbal27 02:11, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - I've removed 90% of the article including the copyvio and promotion. Is now simply a stub about an international school (high schools generally being considered notable). St★lwart111 03:40, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Stalwart111 and WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. NORTH AMERICA1000 08:02, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Possible source, when the school was just built in 2010: [1]. And FYI zh:山东省青岛第一国际学校,산동성칭다오제1국제학교 (Chinese name-comma-Korean name) was deleted by G11 there (they don't have WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES). 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 11:38, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:36, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:36, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as a secondary school per longstanding precedent and consensus. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:32, 4 February 2015 (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.