Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Joseph's College, Anuradhapura

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. Killiondude (talk) 23:28, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

After reviewing the discussion again, it seems to fall into more of a no consensus to delete area rather than "keep," even after discounting the participants who voiced arguments that should be avoided in AfDs. Even still, a no-census results in keeping the page. Killiondude (talk) 22:50, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

St. Joseph's College, Anuradhapura

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

Delete: non-notable, defunct college in Sri Lanka. Google search and alumni search bring nil. Quis separabit? 01:53, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 04:31, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sri Lanka-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 04:32, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: satisfies WP:NSCHOOL. It is not a defunct school - an easy search quickly establishes that. References and notable alumni added. Dan arndt (talk) 03:53, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- And even if it was defunct, why would that be relevant? Wikipedia is not a repository of current affairs. -- Necrothesp (talk) 17:02, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a secondary school per longstanding precedent and consensus and for my usual reasons. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:54, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per the RfC that Necrothesp so delightful chooses to ignore. And so clearly states that SCHOOLOUTCOMES is not a relevant argument. The Banner talk 14:33, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah, obviously you couldn't be bothered to read my other reasons! Apparently in your view all opinions that a secondary school is notable should be discounted. Because. you. are. right! -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:38, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - Let me keep it short... Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. Bye. The Banner talk 19:57, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmm...N, expect a counter-essay to pop up soon:)Winged Blades^Godric 16:58, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete--Fails GNG. Nothing resemblant to significant covg. in sources.Winged Blades^Godric 16:58, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - further sources have been provided to satisfy WP:GNG. Dan arndt (talk) 02:35, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm..did you miss significant coverage?! And WP ain't wiki-source either!Winged Blades^Godric 11:52, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Winged Blades of Godric: I’m not part of your ongoing personal dispute with Necrothesp, so you are going to have to explain your cryptic comments above, preferably in a civil manner. Dan arndt (talk) 14:12, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GNG states If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list. And, please don't dump every GHit retrieved by the school into the article.We aren't into indiscriminately collecting sources about the subject.

And, what led you to infer that I’m a part of an ongoing personal dispute with Necrothesp? Please avoid making such accusations, with ill-considered words.Winged Blades^Godric 14:18, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

From an outsiders point of view based on some of the earlier comments it appeared to me that you may have had some sort of history on these issues, my apologies if I misinterpreted that. In respect to your comments the last time I checked national newspapers, government websites and independently published books were all generally considered reliable sources. The sources that I have provided specifically relate to individual comments provided in the article and are not indiscriminate GHits. Dan arndt (talk) 14:52, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.Anyways, I will re-emphasise the part. word:--significant.If you wish, I can provide an analysis of the sources and their failing GNG.Just to note, alumni biographies noting their school in the most-trivial manner and directory-mentions do not lead to an increase in the notability-quotient of the subject.Winged Blades^Godric 14:56, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That was really in response to the first editors comments that “Google search and alumni search bring nil“, so I was proving that statement was false - nothing more. The reason that I feel the school is notable is because it is over 120years old. It is essentially a catholic school in a very historical and traditional Buddhist city. Frankly it’s really surprising that it survived the national Sinhalese movement in the late 1960s. Dan arndt (talk) 15:14, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: satisfies WP:NSCHOOL. just need to improve.Raith77 (talk) 07:57, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, this is a leading school in Anuradhapura, Sri Lanka. SWR2.9 (talk) 15:18, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep a notable school in Sri Lanka--L Manju (talk) 17:33, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep 120 year history with online reliable sources, probable offline as well Atlantic306 (talk) 17:57, 3 February 2018 (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.