Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lumumba Secondary School

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. bibliomaniac 1 5 07:20, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lumumba Secondary School

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

The article is a basic one sentence description of the school, it hasn't cited any sources since at least 2013, and I couldn't find anything about it in a WP:BEFORE that would pass WP:GNG or WP:NORG. Wikipedia isn't a directory. Adamant1 (talk) 03:43, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 10:36, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 10:36, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete article has no sources.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:53, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Our coverage of African topics is appalling. Let's not make it even worse by deleting an article on Zanzibar's largest secondary school, as confirmed by the very first Google Books hit for the title. Phil Bridger (talk) 13:05, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If heard your arguement come up in AfDs a lot. Maybe the coverage of Africa is appalling because the sources on African topics are appalling. While it sucks that's the case, it doesn't mean there should be an exception to the notibility guidelines for Africa or that Wikipedia should have an article on everything even slightly related to Africa "because Africa." Its not like there isn't some pretty well sourced subjects related to Africa in Wikipedia though and the whole thing is sorta akin the soft bigotry of low expections IMO. Likely people in the English wiki just haven't put the time into finding good African sources because they assume their aren't any. Which then circularly leads to talking points similar to yours. Adamant1 (talk) 19:00, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, didn't you just assume that there aren't any sources about this African subject? There are, and they are readily available. Just look for them before nominating articles for deletion, per WP:BEFORE. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:48, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The thing about an AfD is that it isn't about sources "existing" WP:SOURCESEXIST and the crystal clear guidelines on what constitutes trivial coverage in WP:NORG. Maybe familiarize yourself with them next time before you vote or criticize a nominator. --Adamant1 (talk) 20:38, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it is about sources existing. See WP:NEXIST. — Toughpigs (talk) 21:02, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not really just existing though, because even WP:NEXIST caveats that they have to be "independent and reliable sources. Not to mention it also says "merely asserting that unspecified sources exist is seldom persuasive." Which I think is the more relevant thing to AfDs. Since per WP:DISCUSSAFD "AfDs are a place for rational discussion of whether an article is able to meet Wikipedia's article guidelines and policies." At least IMO going on that and WP:NEXIST AfDs aren't a place to just dump a bunch of random indiscriminate sources. So we can call the whole done and keep every article "because sources." It's a little more nuanced then that. --Adamant1 (talk) 21:41, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Phil Bridger added 2 book sources, qualifying as WP:RS under WP:N, and I found 2 other sources that provide significant coverage: one on SCSU's program providing science textbooks, and a case study on teaching Islamic moral values at the school. Beyond those sources, I was struck by the number of international organizations that have provided help to the school over time (the school must have a fairly aggressive fund-raising capability?), which I believe meet WP:SUSTAINED. I was unable to locate more news sources in English, but for those fluent in Swahili, there is a Tanzania news index that may yield more sources. I would just offer that finding sources in another language is always a challenge, and we have seen many AfD's for schools in 3rd world countries. I appreciate Adamant1's role in calling to our attention articles that are unsourced or poorly sourced. This time, I believe we now have enough WP:RS to meet WP:GNG. Cheers! — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 19:10, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:HEY, thanks to Phil Bridger and Grand'mere Eugene's work. — Toughpigs (talk) 19:34, 2 August 2020 (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.