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. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 17:19, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Edward Richardson Community Primary School[edit]

The Edward Richardson Community Primary School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Primary school. Appears to be non-notable. Delete (w/redirect to whatever makes sense would be fine) appears to be in order. Epeefleche (talk) 21:23, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment The fact the school is possibly built on an ancient landfill site might lend notability if this fact can be substantiated as notable by a reliable source (beyond a class 2 project from 14 years ago). If the article is kept, a good deal of the rest is noise and needs stripping down. Wikipedia isn't free web-space and some of the material is better at home on an official website. Some of it probably doesn't even belong on the schools website never mind here. For example, does anyone need to know there are 7 car parking spaces for staff? Pit-yacker (talk) 22:09, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:57, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:58, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Its notable by virtue of its coverage in independent reliable sources such as this. Warden (talk) 21:23, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. No significant coverage. Run-of-the-mill. A routine government report, as as that linked above, does not establish "significant coverage": It demonstrates only existence, not notability. Neutrality^talk 23:47, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete unless any notability of the school can be shown. Some of the content is clearly very close to being promotional, leaving the possible archeology as the notability - which, it strikes me, isn't about the school at all and so would be better dealt with in Tetford. Show that it's notable rather than that it exists and I'll think about it again. Blue Square Thing (talk) 15:11, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Tetford#Education per standard procedure and where it is already mentioned in depth. Non notable schools are generally not deleted; instead, as demonstrated by 100s of AfD closures, they are redirected to the article about the school district (USA) or to the article about the locality (rest of the world). --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:40, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE for closer: if this AfD is closed as 'redirect', please remember to include the ((R from school)) on the redirect page. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:40, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Non-notable.Fails GNG. Redirect might be preferred if it was enshrined in a guideline or policy. But it's not unfortunately. It's just custom and practice that's grown up that is unsupported by anything official. Let's delete and move on. Might encourage acceptance of a decent notability guideline for schools.Fmph (talk) 10:26, 30 December 2011 (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.