Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oakhaven Baptist Academy
- 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. Geschichte (talk) 15:37, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Oakhaven Baptist Academy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article about a secondary school that does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NSCHOOL / WP:ORGCRIT. No sources in article or found during WP:BEFORE provide direct and indepth WP:SIGCOV. There is basic WP:ROUTINE / normal run of the mill coverage. The article makes no claim towards WP:N. // Timothy :: talk 15:02, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. // Timothy :: talk 15:02, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tennessee-related deletion discussions. // Timothy :: talk 15:02, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:06, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
- Delete. I'm suspicious. It's not indexed at Great Schools. Several Internet searches find wildly contradictory information. I literally could not find a single good, non-newspaper source to confirm any details. Bearian (talk) 15:42, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Given suspicion raised by Bearian would like something firmer than the SOFTDELETE consensus I see now.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:00, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
Relisting comment: Given suspicion raised by Bearian would like something firmer than the SOFTDELETE consensus I see now.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:00, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Delete due to a complete lack of coverage in reliable sources Spiderone 14:38, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- 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.