Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cotwall End Primary School (2nd nomination)

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 redirect to Sedgley#Primary schools. Sandstein 07:11, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cotwall End Primary School

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Non-notable primary school that fails WP:NSCHOOL. Kept at 2006 AfD with arguments such as "notability is not a policy. VERIFIABILITY is policy" and "Just because it is a primary school is of course not a reason to delete it". AusLondonder (talk) 00:28, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and England. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:24, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:NSCHOOL. LibStar (talk) 01:28, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment NSCHOOL has been gutted, it now just directs to WP:GNG and WP:ORG. Jacona (talk) 13:13, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It redirects to a section which states "All universities, colleges and schools, including high schools, middle schools, primary (elementary) schools, and schools that only provide a support to mainstream education must either satisfy the notability guidelines for organizations, the general notability guideline, or both." AusLondonder (talk) 16:21, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete.First, if I'm understanding the somewhat confusing sequence of building demolition and several nursery schools, there is not currently a primary school here, and the statistic in the lead dates back to 2007. There are not enough RS to support a historical article. Second, unfortunately, most of the article seems to be based on original research, without benefit of secondary sources. Fails both GNG and NORG because there's no there, there. — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 18:09, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Sedgley#Primary schools where it is covered. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:49, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect. This present article seems to indicate there is only a nursery school, but I found the 2019 Ofsted report on the nursery and primary school. Thus, I agree the redirect to the Sedgley article is appropriate, where it should be updated beyond the current 1990 status. Also, note the sourcing in the entire Sedgley Education section needs improvement, as a single citation for a single school is not only pathetic, it fails WP:V. Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 18:25, 30 April 2022 (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.