Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lourdes School of Mandaluyong

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 Mandaluyong#Education. Daniel (talk) 23:26, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lourdes School of Mandaluyong edit

[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)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NSCHOOL. The article violates WP:OR and WP:PROMOTION. WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES states that "Secondary schools are not presumed to be notable simply because they exist." —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 12:48, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 12:48, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 12:48, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 12:48, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES also states that "References to demonstrate notability may be offline, and this must be taken into consideration before bringing a page to AFD." The article also refers to a notable entity (WP:N WP:ORG) especially in references to topics regarding Single-sex education and considering that such schools in Metro Manila and in the Philippines are increasingly rare. I believe that the article does not violate promotion norms WP:PROMOTION and references to social media are only in aid of giving users access to further information. Instead of deletion of the article altogether, such external references may simply be removed if one finds them inappropriate or suspicious. This school is a historical landmark in the area with notable alumni and there is value that it has its own article. Improvements in the content may be considered but deletion of the article itself may be an unnecessary and extreme action. JoyfulJourney (talk) 21:24, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@JoyfulJourney: Where are these offline sources that you are talking about? —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 15:53, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@HueMan1: Reseña histórica de los Capuchinos de Filipinas, Bienvenido de Arbeiza (1972 English Version is offline, 1969 Spanish first edition is at here); 100 Years of Capuchin Presence in the Philippines, Delos Santos, ed., 1986; among others. The article will be improved over time. —JoyfulJourney (talk • contributions) 06:12, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@JoyfulJourney: I would suggest adding these information elsewhere (like the education section of Metro Manila or education in the Philippines) since it simply mentions the school. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 14:32, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@HueMan1: References to the institution do not comprise of passing mentions there. There are also university thesis papers made of the pedagogy employed at the school. And I reiterate that the institution is noteworthy in itself for its historic value in the area even if, in order to establish this, merely a collection of "mentions" is established. In addition, following most sternly such rules, then would schools of similar repute and history as Lourdes School of Mandaluyong like Xavier School, Don Bosco Technical College, La Salle Green Hills, and Aquinas School also face deletion? —JoyfulJourney (talk • contributions) 06:56, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@JoyfulJourney: Kinda. That's pretty much how Wikipedia works. If a subject has no significant coverage from independent sources, it will fail WP:GNG. I don't know why we still keep these poorly written and poorly sourced articles here. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 11:54, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See OTHER STUFF EXISTS GenQuest ^"scribble" 21:24, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:39, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per GNG. A sixty year-old school should have more sourcing than this. It should have made its mark by now if notable. Unfortunate. GenQuest ^"scribble" 21:21, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Mandaluyong#Education: There's a sentence which describes the mentioned school. It's best to put the sources there and add a few more sentences about the school if needed. ASTIG😎 _{(ICE T • ICE CUBE)} 10:00, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Mandaluyong#Education since I agree with Superastig that a redirect is the best option. This is a private school, the bar for notability is much higher for private schools, and this one clearly doesn't meet it. I'm fine with the article being redirected though. --Adamant1 (talk) 13:24, 26 June 2021 (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.