Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oasis Academy 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 delete. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 02:53, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oasis Academy School

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

No indication of notability per WP:GNG and WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. —me_and 18:02, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete per WP:CSD#G5, created by a confirmed sockpuppet of an indef-blocked user. --Finngall ^talk 15:20, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Finngall: The article had been tagged by another editor for speedy deletion under G5, but that was declined as the article creator wasn't blocked at the time of creation. —me_and 22:36, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've restored the article and reverted the good faith close. As me_and correctly notes, the CSD G5 criteria does not apply in this case. Sorry for the confusion folks!--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:16, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 00:40, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Can someone explain more why you feel it does not meet WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES? If it is a secondary school with proof that it exists, this is normally enough to show notability. I also note that there is some confusion on the page with links to Oasis Academy, which redirects to an unrelated school chain in the UK. JMWt (talk) 09:42, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looking again at WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES, I missed the bit where high schools are usually kept; I saw no evidence of this place being a degree-awarding institution and so assumed it fell into the first bullet as not having a clear claim to notability. Nonetheless, I can't actually find an independent source that even establishes the school exists, so I think the "when zero independent sources can be found" clause applies. It's neither of the Oasis Academies listed in Google Maps in Nepal, the only source in the article is the Facebook page of Pashupati Academy, where I can find no mention of Oasis Academy, and I can't find anything about this school on Google. —me_and 12:43, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, this school isn't listed in the school district's table of examination results, which would strongly imply it doesn't exist, at least not as an independent institution. —me_and 12:58, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I think we'd need someone who speaks the appropriate language to be absolutely sure that this is a hoax, but I'm generally tending to think delete. JMWt (talk) 14:27, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's unlikely to be a hoax, but "unlikely to be a hoax" isn't "there is independent evidence that it isn't a hoax", which is the requirement here AIUI. —me_and 18:56, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:14, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:14, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 21:07, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

delete nonnotable private school. no independent sources. Staszek Lem (talk) 21:18, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There is no confirmation that this school exists, and even if it does, the article does not claim to be a secondary school. (With a staff of 12 and a student body of 200 I think it's unlikely to be a secondary school.) If it is not a secondary school it fails WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES even if it does exist. Note also that the article claims it is a subdivision of Sainik School and is located in Jhapa District, but neither of those articles mention it. --MelanieN (talk) 02:12, 3 March 2016 (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.