Deletion of Abercorn Primary School

Comment: to "reply to user Fram", a few posts above: in the "Problem articles where deletion may not be needed" of , there is an ecplicit reference to "stubs but with potential", which should not get deleted. I agree;, being a stub is not a reason for deletion per se, and contrary to what people seem to have read in my posts, I don't think I have ever used it. I have used two main arguments for deletion: some of the articles are nothing but directory articles, and all of the articles are about non notable subjects. The first is a policy, the second is a general way of looking at what should be included and what not, again in the spirit of , the general rule that WP is not an indiscriminate collection of information. There is no notability guideline for schools, and that is a pity, but if you put your standard for inclusion higher than "all schools are notable" (which, I repeat it, is in itself a debatable and valid position), then many primary schools, for example the ones up for AfD here, would be the first to go. I hope we can all agree on that? Now, when you try to find comparable guidelines and situations, one you easily find is , which I used ''not'' to show that schools should be deleted (as  does not address schools), but that the arguments used that an article should not and can not be deleted because it is sourced and verifiable are invalid. A sourced and verifiable band, corporation, person, game, ... can all be deleted if they fail to reach the minimum standard for notability. Since there is no ''fixed'' minimum standard for schools, it is up to us, every AfD again, to decide individually what our standard is, and it is the right of the defenders of the articles to give as much information and sources as possible to make the articles pass the standards of more people. I hope that still everyone agrees? Now, the debate is about what your individual standard is, and if any of the articlss have given any info that would make them acceptable to more people than just those who think that all schools are notable. For me, none of the articls have done that, and as my standard is that a school is not notable for being a school, they all should be deleted
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:DP||WP:NOT||WP:CORP||WP:CORP)

Comment: articles are excellent starting points for each of these schools, and can only improve with addiitonal work and time. Does not meet any criteria for 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: Wikipedia is |not a directory of primary schools in Northern Ireland
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: Notability itself is not a policy () because it is too hard to draw a line.  Neither do chools.  It is a trap to compare a school other things.   Its nature is simply different.  Another can compare it with the states and counties in the United States. You might never know what Valley County, Nebraska is.  Why keep the county article if it is only locally notable?  Gamma-Hydroxybutyric acid is only notable to a small community.  Why keep the article?  &mdash
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:S)

Comment: per 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:DP)

Comment: per  (as cited by nominator) and lack of encyclopedic value. The "sum of all knowledge" does not mean trivia, indiscriminate, and directory entries. As a '''comment''', "bulk" nominations are ''not'' improper (see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion#How_to_list_multiple_related_pages_for_deletion|listing multiple pages for deletion
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: based on precedent for schools.  No real policy reason is given.  Its not enough to name a policy page (like ), but one must explain how it applies.  As shown above, nothing in the articles goes against that (or any other) policy.  This is no more a directory, than would be euqally tiny stubs on equally small townships
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)