Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lowanna Secondary College

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. - Mailer Diablo 11:01, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lowanna Secondary College

Lowanna Secondary College (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

School with no apparent claim to notability Ghost Yacht 14:41, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Keep All high/secondary schools are notable, which is why Wikipedia has articles about thousands of them. Postlebury 20:41, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep I agree with Postlebury, this article should be kept as it is about a high school, however significant, and from my understanding, wiki is aiming to create a comprehensive number of articles on high schools around the world. Tinkstar1985 04:30, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete There is certainly no general agreement that high schools are always notable,and the recent discussion at WP:SCHOOLS was eventually marked rejected, after finding no consensus about anything. So we're dealing with the general N factors, and the article provides only directory information and information about the catchment area changes. There are furthermore no independent sources-- just its own website and a directory. DGG 05:01, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep DGG's statement about no independent sources in longer correct - I've put in the work and added 3 - as well as the specific references to the schools own website. I don't think the Advert tag is relevant either as I have edited out anything that appeared to meet this decription. Take another look at the article guys. It might still need work but thats no reason to delete. Tinkstar1985 06:35, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately almost all of them emanate from the college, and that's exactly what is meant by non-indpendent. . DGG 05:55, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
The Monash University publications, state government press release, and Latrobe City (LGA) site are hopefully each considered independent and reliable sources (particularly as the information states occurences and facts rather than opppinion or promotional material). What I am trying to demonstrate is that whilst the article does need work, it is unecessary to delete it on this basis. Tinkstar1985 13:00, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak keep. I see plenty of high schools in Category:Schools in Victoria, and this one is the amalgamation of three smaller ones; is that enough? not 100% sure. John Vandenberg 12:38, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 12:38, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep While I still agree that this article doesn't asert notability it is well referenced which is a dramatic improvement over many school articles. Garrie 02:20, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
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.