Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Forel International School

Forel International 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)

Fails WP:ORG, WP:NHS Serv181920 (talk) 09:23, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Serv181920 (talk) 09:23, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Totally unclear whether this is one school or three, when it existed or whether it is more than a K-4 elementary school. Searches lead us to a cable tie company. It would be helpful if this had been explained in the nomination! The reason is WP:SIGCOV, as the one CZ reference is trivial.--ClemRutter (talk) 12:51, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
: I'd suggest merge some content into the Bahá'í school article. Smkolins (talk) 17:57, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nothing to show this school actually meets notability criteria.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:01, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep notable, Google gives you 5,100 results on "forel international school", I checked the first few pages all are relevant. Tarikhejtemai (talk) 18:22, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Check WP:GNUM Serv181920 (talk) 17:37, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

that's just a (dormant) proposal, not part of Wikipedia guidelines. Tarikhejtemai (talk) 02:50, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Most of the article is based on no source and the sources listed are not notable. The article mentions three sources: source 1 simply states it was established by so and so person. Source 2 is a dead link which can be found on archive.org. When opened by archive.org the source is mostly about the daughter of the person that established the school. This source also has no mention of the many things stated in the article. Source 3 simply refers to an event that was held at the school. These events are held at schools worldwide on a daily basis and usually have no importance.Illuminator123 (talk) 16:28, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sources and the article can be improved, the question is not about the status quo of the article, the question is rather on the notability of the topic. Tarikhejtemai (talk) 04:45, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is clearly not notable, unless supported with reliable secondary, tertiary sources.Serv181920 (talk) 10:39, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion isn't just a matter of notability. Status Quo makes it a good candidate for deletion. Illuminator123 (talk)