Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aquinas College Perth Academic Studies

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 No consensus. Cbrown1023 23:25, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aquinas College Perth Academic Studies

User:Smbarnzy has not only heavily edited Aquinas College, Perth, but created a beautiful walled garden consisting of the sub-articles

which I hereby all nominate for deletion. While I recognize the enormous effort Smbarnzy has made, the level of detail is both unprecedented and unencyclopedic. There are no external sources whatsoever given for any of these articles, and while the Aquinas College sources may be accurate enough, this lack of secondary sources may serve as a sign for the lack of notability of the information. As an extreme example, most of the Academic Studies article is a list of the subjects students may choose to take in grades 10-12. If there is anything extraordinary in this list (such as, say, "Religious Formation"), the article offers no information about it (while the main Aquinas College article does). Concerning a possible merge, I feel that for each of the topics the main article already contains an adequate summary. Huon 14:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Back salvagable notable info Aquinas College, Perth article, provided it doesnt duplicate info already in main article. --Arnzy (talk • contribs) 14:58, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and Delete - I agree with Arnzy, the best course of action would be to merge all the useable information with the main article about the college and the delete these articles. Jayden54 15:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep while I recognise that User:Huon has acceptible/valid reasons for requesting deletion, some of these articles are expandable to encompass more than just Aquinas College. Merging back into Aquinas College isnt an option as these are the result of stripping Aquinas College down from this version diff only a couple of hours before they were nominated for deletion. I had just suggested User:Gnangarra/Aquinas as a way forward for the Aquinas article to those editors, that included making these daughter articles. In this case WP:BITE should also be considered and give the editors time to address WP:N and WP:V reqiurements. Gnangarra 23:18, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, no merge. The material in these articles is likely verifiable only at the school's website and other outlets associated with the school itself (e.g. the Hockey Club website). Information that can only be verified at primary sources should, in general, not be included at Wikipedia. External sources must take note of any information before we consider it notable enough for inclusion here. Pan Dan 23:27, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless verifiable sources can be found for this article such is who was Dux. Same with the associated articles. Capitalistroadster 01:25, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep, Merge & Delete~~ - If you think the page should be deleted then merge it into the Aquinas College, Perth page. If you would like to keep the article then keep it. Smbarnzy 12:39, 14 December 2006 (UTC)\[reply]
I am willing to accept that some of these articles may be deleted. But i think four of them must be kept; boarding, infrastructure, house system and most importantly sport. All others can be merged back into the main article. But to the person who put them up for deletion - "Doesnt the article look alot better with all of the daughter articles? it makes it look encyclopedic and well groomed. Please re-consider on those 4 i suggested, AT BARE MINIMUM. Thanks =) Smbarnzy 12:42, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- 'strong merge. Looking at the must keeps listed,keeping would require that these particular spects of A.C. be notable in their own right--for example, if their house system was a precdent for many other schools & this had been discussed by 3rd party sources. This is obviously not the case, and no such assertions are made. They are just lists of the names similar in organization to all similar places. Even the school's stength, sports,--it lists in detai every single team, giving the record year byt year, even those that have never made it beyond 5th place. This is absurd. WP has a separate article for Ohio State athletics, and I suggest that OSU is about what it would take to justify such an article. As a closer comparison, Rugby doesn't have one--it's just in the main article. DGG 01:29, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Although i thank you for recognising that i have made alot of effort here, i would like to clear up one point: i have added alot of content to the Aquinas College Page, i practically added all of it. Thanks =) Smbarnzy 12:48, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep These articles are essentially valuable, athough the academic one is too focused, i think the rest should be kept. They are a valuable resource and by deleting them you are not encouraging this new user to keep editing and making new pages. Keep them. And if the decision is to delete them, them atleast keep the sport page, that had been up for some time, and is quite extensive. If all get deleted, then merge back to Aquinas Page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Smbarnzy (talk • contribs) 08:13, December 15, 2006 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Capitalistroadster 01:25, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and merge where possible - agree strongly with Gnangarra's comments. Obviously not all of these areas requires an article, but that should be discussed on the talk pages of the articles concerned rather than sent straight to AfD. Orderinchaos78 08:51, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge wherever possible, there's way too much detail here, but also a lot of stuff that can probably be kept. Use all this info to make Aquinas College, Perth a featured article, or something. Lankiveil 05:16, 16 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Keep. The more detail the better. If they can be merged into the parent fine. But the topic deserves an articles so these sub articles fall more into the realm of editorial discussion than deletion. --JJay 22:04, 20 December 2006 (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.