382:. I think I'll explain my reasoning more for asking for this to be brought to AfD. Secondary schools have repeatedly held to be inherently notable and at the same time one-line stubs are often held to be viable stubs, hence I think it's a stretch to think that a one-line stub on a secondary school will inevitably be deleted. As the speedy deleting admin stated this article met no speedy delete criteria and consensus is far from clear when IAR speedys should be allowed but most people seem to think it should only be in very clear cut cases, which I've just explained I don't think this is. Additionally, unless an article is unsalvageable it is unusual for an article to be deleted because of the state it's in. A few minutes work by me has made the article I think in a much better state.
597:
on
Knowledge, not on irc. The article cannot be judged on the basis of prior discussion there, which should not even have been mentioned here. The nom's speedy was totally out of place, as he seems not to understand the basic speedy criterion that a short article with identifying information is not empty. He is welcome to his own view at AfD of course, but he has given no reason for not following our usual criteria. Indeed, the result of investigation further supports them. I additionally mention cultural bias, with respect to the area of the world about which we have the most disproportionately scarce information here.
211:), and so we're back to what I'd tried to avoid. I still strongly feel as though this article, such as it is, still needs to be deleted. It does not justify the notability of the school in any way; it provides absolutely no encyclopedic content beyond the founding date of the school and its rough location; due to chronic grammatical errors, what little content it has is difficult to read; it is so short it nearly qualifies for speedy deletion under A1 or A3; and anyone wishing to write a proper article would need to start from scratch with a more proper title for the page in any event.
302:
sources. I was mainly asking to explain a bit more the justification for your !vote given past precedence (this could be as simple as I disagree with the precedent). Your second point I agree with, but it's not currently a speedy delete criteria, and see my comment below on why I think it's important to have discussion on the issue - hopefully by having them now we'll make things easier in future - think of this as a bit of a test case. If consensus is very clear here then I may well use it as the reason to start an RfC on extending the speedy delete criteria.
200:
moment), but while it was borderline for several, we could not find that it fit squarely within a single speedy deletion crtieria. In the end, I deleted the article with the reasoning "single sentence provides no encyclopedic value", as while no CSD applied, I felt that PROD'ing or AfD'ing the article would be an unnecessary waste of the community's time, and the narrow definitions of the criteria were in this case
385:
speedy deletions like this are out of line and could be harming the project in two ways. Firstly and most importantly by hindering consensus building that such articles should be speedy deleted and secondly by possibly discouraging new users who see their new article deleted for no allowable reason.
255:
But aren't all high schools considered inherently notable because sources will be there. We can't apply one rule for US high schools and another for
Nigerian high schools as that's extremely biased. If we assume the sources are there for US high schools then we have to assume they're there for this
596:
It is firmly established that all secondary schools with a genuine existence are considered notable for
Knowledge purposes.-- and, as expected, sources have been found, which is why we have that general practice. We also have a general practice of making decisions about articles in open discussions
384:
In many ways I hope that this is a very clear cut decision so that we can start forming consensus that articles such as this can be speedy deleted but until such time as a consensus is clear (on wikipedia, allowing all wikipedians, including those that don't use IRC, to take part) that they can be,
199:
removed the CSD notice on the grounds that schools do not qualify under A7. Abu then came to the #wikipedia-en-help channel on IRC and spoke to myself and several other users about how to proceed with the article. We came to an agreement that the article needed to go (I'll explain my reasoning in a
301:
they pretty much are as has been demonstrated by numerous AfDs. Doesn't alter the fact that we could be showing bias, because as mainly
English speaking editors in a limited number of countries we'd stuggle to find sources in Nigeria. Tikiwont below has shown that it is possible to find some
579:, the consensus has been to keep secondary schools unless they fail verifiability. Thus, this is a keeper. I hope we are not trying to apply some kind of First World prejudice against Third World schools that may not have a website or a plethora of web-listed newspapers to prove notability. --
518:. In Nigerian terms this school is more important than most US High Schools. It should have been pretty obvious that with time and effort, sources would be found, as they have been. English is one of the languages of Nigeria. We should cover it as well as we cover the US, UK, Australia etc. --
501:. I've added some sourced content to the article. This is a good demonstration of why admins should not be speedy deleting articles against the consensus-agreed criteria. The waste of time has been caused here by the rush to delete an article rather than making any effort to improve it.
160:
88:
83:
92:
75:
481:
154:
79:
71:
63:
120:
175:
142:
115:
625:
608:
588:
567:
550:
533:
510:
493:
471:
445:
420:
394:
372:
358:
325:
311:
288:
265:
249:
224:
57:
406:
136:
456:
430:
316:
I don't see it as bias, but understand how some might see it that way, I tend not to be governed by precedent, but what is there in frount of me at the time.
132:
182:
148:
575:
The existence of this school is confirmed, and its status as a secondary school is confirmed, per links provided at the article. According to
576:
191:
This is largely a procedural nomination due to a contested deletion. This article was originally marked for deletion under CSD A7 by
17:
403:
640:
204:- or perhaps more appropriately, preventing the community from focusing time on improving the project elsewhere.
36:
639:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
621:
506:
489:
233:
Article requires significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject hence lacks
53:
563:
350:
317:
280:
277:
168:
584:
546:
416:
354:
321:
284:
208:
617:
502:
485:
467:
441:
239:
192:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
49:
559:
526:
390:
368:
307:
261:
346:
604:
580:
542:
412:
342:
234:
212:
201:
616:
Since the nomination of the article the source situation hos improved dramatically.
463:
437:
402:- Seems that one of their teachers developed a "Multipurpose Solar Energy Device".
109:
409:
519:
386:
364:
303:
257:
196:
599:
345:- agree with nom this is a waste of the community's time - is it getting
480:. Tikiwont has already found some sources, and there's coverage in
633:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
408:
and there should be other more positive news that this stabbing.
237:, Also its a one line statement with no encyclopedic content.(
72:
Special
Science Senior Secondary School, Makurdi, Benue State
64:
Special
Science Senior Secondary School, Makurdi, Benue State
577:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes##Schools
105:
101:
97:
167:
207:Dpmuk has now contested the deletion (discussion
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
643:). No further edits should be made to this page.
293:OK, if we're going to be pedantic, nothing is
181:
8:
541:. Notable school. Verifiable information. --
457:list of Schools-related deletion discussions
431:list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions
451:
425:
202:preventing efforts to improve the project
455:: This debate has been included in the
429:: This debate has been included in the
363:Please see my reply to the above !vote.
276:Nothing is "inherently notable" - see
7:
24:
405:. It has recently been renovated
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
256:school, just harder to find.
626:10:18, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
609:22:36, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
589:04:27, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
568:07:01, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
551:08:21, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
534:06:06, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
511:18:24, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
494:17:34, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
472:16:36, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
446:16:36, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
421:22:36, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
395:22:05, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
373:22:05, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
359:19:15, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
326:11:55, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
312:10:23, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
289:06:47, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
266:22:05, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
250:18:41, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
225:16:00, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
58:02:34, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
660:
636:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
297:inherently notable but
558:per nom. Not notable.
44:The result was
474:
460:
448:
434:
248:
193:User:Abutorsam007
651:
638:
531:
524:
461:
435:
341:- Clearly fails
246:
245:
238:
186:
185:
171:
123:
113:
95:
34:
659:
658:
654:
653:
652:
650:
649:
648:
647:
641:deletion review
634:
527:
520:
241:
240:
128:
119:
86:
70:
67:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
657:
655:
646:
645:
629:
628:
611:
591:
570:
553:
536:
513:
496:
475:
449:
423:
397:
383:
377:
376:
375:
335:
334:
333:
332:
331:
330:
329:
328:
271:
270:
269:
268:
220:
217:
189:
188:
125:
121:AfD statistics
66:
61:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
656:
644:
642:
637:
631:
630:
627:
623:
619:
615:
612:
610:
606:
602:
601:
595:
592:
590:
586:
582:
578:
574:
571:
569:
565:
561:
557:
554:
552:
548:
544:
540:
537:
535:
532:
530:
525:
523:
517:
514:
512:
508:
504:
500:
497:
495:
491:
487:
483:
479:
476:
473:
469:
465:
458:
454:
450:
447:
443:
439:
432:
428:
424:
422:
418:
414:
410:
407:
404:
401:
398:
396:
392:
388:
381:
378:
374:
370:
366:
362:
361:
360:
356:
352:
348:
344:
340:
337:
336:
327:
323:
319:
315:
314:
313:
309:
305:
300:
296:
292:
291:
290:
286:
282:
279:
275:
274:
273:
272:
267:
263:
259:
254:
253:
251:
247:
244:
236:
232:
229:
228:
227:
226:
223:
222:
221:
218:
215:
210:
205:
203:
198:
194:
184:
180:
177:
174:
170:
166:
162:
159:
156:
153:
150:
147:
144:
141:
138:
134:
131:
130:Find sources:
126:
122:
117:
111:
107:
103:
99:
94:
90:
85:
81:
77:
73:
69:
68:
65:
62:
60:
59:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
635:
632:
618:Pax:Vobiscum
613:
598:
593:
572:
555:
538:
529:(Discussion)
528:
521:
515:
503:Phil Bridger
498:
486:Phil Bridger
477:
452:
426:
399:
379:
338:
298:
294:
278:WP:INHERITED
242:
230:
214:
213:
206:
190:
178:
172:
164:
157:
151:
145:
139:
129:
45:
43:
31:
28:
482:these books
243:Abu Torsam
155:free images
50:Ron Ritzman
560:WikiManOne
197:User:Dpmuk
464:• Gene93k
438:• Gene93k
581:MelanieN
543:Tikiwont
413:Tikiwont
351:Codf1977
318:Codf1977
299:de facto
281:Codf1977
116:View log
499:Comment
400:Comment
380:Comment
295:de jure
161:WP refs
149:scholar
89:protect
84:history
556:Delete
343:WP:GNG
339:Delete
235:WP:GNG
231:Delete
133:Google
93:delete
605:talk
522:Bduke
387:Dpmuk
365:Dpmuk
304:Dpmuk
258:Dpmuk
176:JSTOR
137:books
110:views
102:watch
98:links
16:<
622:talk
614:Keep
594:Keep
585:talk
573:Keep
564:talk
547:talk
539:Keep
516:Keep
507:talk
490:talk
478:Keep
468:talk
453:Note
442:talk
427:Note
417:talk
391:talk
369:talk
355:talk
347:cold
322:talk
308:talk
285:talk
262:talk
219:fold
216:Hers
209:here
169:FENS
143:news
106:logs
80:talk
76:edit
54:talk
46:keep
600:DGG
462:--
436:--
183:TWL
118:•
114:– (
624:)
607:)
587:)
566:)
549:)
509:)
492:)
484:.
470:)
459:.
444:)
433:.
419:)
411:--
393:)
371:)
357:)
349:?
324:)
310:)
287:)
264:)
252:)
195:;
163:)
108:|
104:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
82:|
78:|
56:)
48:.
620:(
603:(
583:(
562:(
545:(
505:(
488:(
466:(
440:(
415:(
389:(
367:(
353:(
320:(
306:(
283:(
260:(
187:)
179:·
173:·
165:·
158:·
152:·
146:·
140:·
135:(
127:(
124:)
112:)
74:(
52:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.