Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bon Accueil State College

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 keep. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:54, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bon Accueil State College

[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)

I did a PROD on this due to it's lack of nobility that unfortunately was removed because "secondary schools." When they are not inherently notable per NORG and SCHOOLOUTCOMES. Something the person who removed the PROD seemed to have ignored. So, here we are. What it comes down to is that this lacks the multiple in-depth reliable sources it would need to pass either the general notability guidelines or the ones for organizations. Just to repeat, secondary schools are not inherently notable per WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. Therefore, the discussion should be in relation to the notability guidelines and the quality of sourcing (or lack thereof). Adamant1 (talk) 14:44, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 14:57, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mauritius-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 14:57, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 15:16, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The article does not pass GNG or NORG. BEFORE showed only sparse routine run of the mill local coverage, nothing that establishes notability. The single reference in the article does not meet WP:IS or WP:SIGCOV. // Timothy :: talk 22:45, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - there is an allegation that it's the biggest (out of about 56) secondary schools in that country. Can we find any evidence? Bearian (talk) 17:46, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Even if it was it wouldn't be automatically notable and would still need multiple in-depth reliable sources to pass the notability guidelines. --Adamant1 (talk) 23:13, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep "SSS Bon Accueil" was the magic search term: [1] [2] ([3] just a mention but notes it's a top school) [4] [5] [6] SportingFlyer T·C 14:38, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, what happened to all that systemic bias when it comes to sourcing that keep voters are always going off about. It's almost like it's not a thing and the people who brought it up where just handwaving. Weird. <---(in case anyone feels like crying foul I'm (mostly) just being sarcastic about it). --Adamant1 (talk) 16:57, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:36, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:40, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per SportingFlyer's sources. — Toughpigs (talk) 14:24, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Sourcing meets WP:GNG. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:18, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The sourcing provided by SportingFlyer is actually pretty bad. For instance, one of the stories is about them getting a computer room. Which is pretty muh. One source doesn't even mention them at all. Two are on the same thing, some students taking issue with one of their faculty members leavening. One is about a few students doing a writing group. Another is on the starting a school newspaper. All of those are extremely trivial run of the mill things that every schools does. It's also worth mentioning that four of the stories are from the same outlet. Not that I expect the people who have voted keep so far to care, but hopefully other people who contribute to this actually look at the sources, consider if they actually meet the notability guidelines, and put the due diligence into this that's required. --Adamant1 (talk) 11:29, 10 November 2020 (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.