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 of the debate was Keep.. The Land 18:50, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This appears to be an unremarkable private school. The article does not list an notability of this school whatsoever. James084 17:16, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge w/town per WP:SCH proposal.Gateman1997 19:37, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, appears to be a real school. Private schools don't make good merge candidates, especially old ones. Kappa 19:48, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as it now meets the three non-generic sentence requirement of WP:SCH. --Rob 20:28, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Good start and can only get better. Interesting alumni. Fully meets school guidelines for those who care. -- JJay 20:36, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. It is quite old. It clearly needs more work - adding more alummni, history, etc., but that should come with time. --Bduke 00:57, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unfortunately, a year from now it is very likely it will look just as it is today. While people do not hesitate to create school stubs, they are much more reluctant to develop them into interesting, comprehensive articles. Denni ☯ 02:55, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well I see five editors have worked on it today. Why not make it six Denni? Or would you rather wait till a year from now? -- JJay 03:27, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actually, if you take a look at the edit history (excluding bot edits and vandal/anti-vandal edits) for other schools in the same category you'll see, these articles are being updated much more frequently then suggested, outside of AFDs. I think the problem you mention is when somebody goes and creates 20 substubs for elementary schools built in recent times in a highly centrally run school district. Its much harder finding information for such schools, which I've been open to merging them up in many cases. But, schools, like this one, with substantial history and greater autonomy tend to have a good basis for expansion. --Rob 05:17, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Once again, real schools get real articles! And at least one person is trying to improve it. Grandmasterka 04:54, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per WP:SCH, notable 120+ year old school. Silensor 05:20, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Meets the requirements of WP:SCH. Cheers -- Ianblair23 (talk) 10:30, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Ianblair23 (talk) 10:32, 3 February 2006 (UTC)"[reply]
• Keep. Per WP:SCH. Cnwb 06:13, 4 February 2006 (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.