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. — CharlotteWebb 16:10, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Contested prod, moving to AFD instead. No opinion. Aecis^Bravado 13:37, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep - seems to have some semi notable alumni. Alot more content in this article than lots of other school articles I have seen. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 15:00, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you. I have tried to put informative information onto the page and link it to some of our alumni. Indeed it was because of these alumni I created a page! I am now having problems accessing the deletion discussion because the school's security software is blocking the page! I hope this comment is in the correct format. -- Mike.Gibb (Mike Gibb) 15:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you are related to the school, you might wanna check up on Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Autobiography. Aecis^Bravado 18:36, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thank you for this advice; I now understand how this could be a conflict of interest. I hope the article is seen as purely informative and encyclopedic, and not self promoting despite my involvement. I will not edit the page any more and leave it to the community to decide if it stays or is deleted. -- Mike.Gibb (Mike Gibb) 20:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep Has quite a bit more content than alot of other school stubs on Wikipedia, and seems to have notable alumi. Deletion of it might question retainment of other school stubs. Bungle44 20:58, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep If the articles about the notable alumni of this school end up linking back to this school, then this school article will serve as source of additional info about persons already established as being notable, and hence the article should be kept. TonyAbou-Assaleh 21:37, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep just as valid as any other school stub (despite COI which may necessitate editing), should just be tagged for wikification Madmedea 22:51, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of UK-related deletions. -- SkierRMH 23:07, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep — RJH (talk) 18:17, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• keep please this school is notable to the community and has several famous alumni too yuckfoo 20:27, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete It isnt the content but the notability, & 3 alums is not enough, and there is nothing else at all of any note. For those who thin it notable, just for what is it notable?DGG 00:38, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment You make it sound like any article which is on Wikipedia NEEDS to have global notability before it should even be considered as a valid article, regardless of content that might actually be valid and serving a purpose. Sure, I agree that most articles need to be notable to some extent, and some with masses of content are as useful as a blank page, but given there are tons of school articles on Wikipedia that maybe only a handful of people know about, this does have quite a bit more useful information to the passing reader. My nomination of Weak Keep wasn't because I feel it deserves to stay, but because it contains an amount of content which gives it better grounds to remain. Bungle44 18:40, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep for reasons described at User:Silensor/Schools, also meets proposed schools guidelines. Silensor 02:28, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Not notable: there are hundreds of schools just like it. I don't buy the "alumni" argument: people have to be educated somewhere, and there's no evidence that the alumni's success is due to their attending this school. WMMartin 15:25, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep or Merge article seems to pass all of the WP:SCHOOLS content, but if it must go merge per WP:LOCAL.  ALKIVAR™ ☢ 07:14, 27 January 2007 (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.