Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guilford Day 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: AfD rarely has to make judgements on how well-written an article is. With no case for notability (and five days - seven in this case - is long enough to show non-trivial coverage in multiple independent reliable sources), the result is delete. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 14:06, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Guilford Day School

Guilford Day School (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Non-notability; see WP:SCHOOL, etc. Split Infinity ^(talk) 05:53, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

• Weak Keep - I was unsure what to do with this article, as it is a school that fails to provide why it's notable. However, due to how well the article is formatted and worded on the first try I am inclined to keep for the time being, allowing for a bit more time to let the author assert notability. I recommend that this AfD last the entire five days and not be closed before then to allow time for the author to fix any problems with the article However, a major problem, beyond its lack of notability is the fact that it sounds like an advertisement. Pumeleon^T 05:57, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I'm going to have to agree with Pumeleon; it was a great first article, and the author should be allowed the time to correct it. _{The previous unsigned comment was added by Somitho on 06:22, December 17, 2006 UTC}
• I edited in a few rounds to make it more clear exactly how I've changed the original article. I actually was a student there, and I apparently disguised my distaste for the place a little too well. Look on the bright side - I didn't try to include a section on the general emotional state of the upper school students. Ignis 07:19, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep this article is better sourced and the topic is much more notable than many other school articles. TSO1D 15:59, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete I don't see how this school stands out from other special schools. Also looking at the article you would have to stretch the truth a little too much to claim that this is a well formatted article. It consists mainly of small 4-5 line sections. The entire first section is just a copy from the school's website. MartinDK 16:38, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

• Comment - My only comment about the formatting was that it was good for being a first revision of a new editor. Obviously it has its flaws, but those are being worked on. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pumeleon (talk • contribs) 18:21, 17 December 2006 (UTC).

• Delete another run of the mill school that is simply unnotable. Eusebeus 17:02, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. I agree with Pumeleon that the AfD should run the entire five days—which is the usual procedure anyway. I'm willing to change my vote if the article is expanded to include good, verifiable source citations to reliable sources that show that there is widespread interest in the school and that it is considered to be of some special importance in educational circles. Dpbsmith (talk) 21:17, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - no notability asserted, Wikipedia not for adverts. Moreschi 21:49, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
• keep please the school looks uniquely notable not sure erasing is the best option here Yuckfoo 02:21, 21 December 2006 (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.