Select Page

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Utpal Shanghvi 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 keep. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:26, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Utpal Shanghvi School

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

Utpal Shanghvi School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

100% unsourced and reads like an advertisement. Listing here for community input. TomStar81 (Talk) 04:46, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 04:59, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 05:27, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 05:28, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • And also, that the refs you quoted are directory listings as a result of paid promo, not reliable third-party "independent" significant coverage. --qedk (t 桜 c) 17:20, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Please provide reference of your claim that the ranking are "a result of paid promo". Also, provide ref why Hindustan Times is not "independent" from the subject school. Without such references, these are just your opinion. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 11:01, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The article is literally a directory listing and quotes the the principal, what are you talking about? --qedk (t 桜 c) 14:26, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Scott Burley (talk) 07:10, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete: a school that exist, which can be verified. But still the school does not pass WP:GNG. Also per February 2017 RFC. WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES itself clearly states (which was decided in the RfC): Secondary schools are not presumed to be notable simply because they exist. and WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES should be added to the Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions[...]. SCHOOLOUTCOMES also provides the link to that RfC. Basically, as this school fails WP:NGEO, WP:ORG, and WP:GNG as well, there is no reason at all to keep the article. —usernamekiran(talk) 19:45, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I wasnt aware of the RFC that makes SCHOOLOUTCOMES redundant now. Hence striked out the rationale in my !vote. But i maintain my Keep as the school passes GNG as well. Article has been improved thus. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 08:12, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
it still lacks significant coverage. —usernamekiran(talk) 17:07, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
School's annual day gets full news article. So does it's cleanliness drive. Students keep appearing in various news for the sports and academics. They get scholarship. Schools gets award and also is notably first Indian School to get ISO certificate. Did you even browse through the article? That's significant coverage enough. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 18:49, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. By our current standards of sourcing, there's enough for notability . The RfC on schools did not say that high shools weren't notable; it didn't even say that most or even many high schools were unlikely to be notable;it meely said we could not quote Schooloutcomes and leave it at that., but make an argument. The argument that mos thighschools will have sources if you look sufficienly which was one of the bases of the former schooloutcomes remains valid--and this article proves it. And way back 10 and 11 years ago when there were attempts to delete as many schools as possible, even then the argument theat there were notable alumni, was generally acceptted as implying `nhy --and there are here. DGG ( talk ) 08:52, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep by seconding DGG's comment, and some other notes: The school was started in 1982 so I believe there would have to be reliable sources about the construction and opening not online. Also while many of the cited pages are routine news (see WP:ROUTINE) there would have to be non routine coverage in Mumbai newspapers. I'll check Indian newspapers but I will also ask Indian editors for assistance. Non routine coverage often includes info about building construction, renovation, or expansion of the campus. Any changes in headmaster that are controversial may count too. WhisperToMe (talk) 11:11, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Found possibly a source with significant coverage:
    • Business India, Nummers 642-647. A.H. Advani, 2002. p. 24.
    • Quote: "His Utpal Shanghvi School is the first and only school in the country to get the iso9001 certification way back in 1994. It also achieved recognition from the French Bureau Veritas Quality International, a world leader in quality certification from[...]"
  • If you like I can ask Wikipedia:RX for the source. WhisperToMe (talk) 14:29, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
WhisperToMe I have used that source to mention that the school is first indian school to get ISO 9001. But i couldn't get the full article to add more. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 05:16, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There have been no changes in the article post QEDK commented here. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 05:29, 25 October 2019 (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.