Council High School (Idaho): A search for sources only turned up primary sources or unreliable sources such as databases etc.  Lavalizard101 ( talk ) 12:31, 12 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education , Schools ,  and Idaho .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:38, 12 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  This school has been in existence for over 100 years.  We generally keep public high schools (not policy, but that's what happens).  Sources do not have to be in the article, they need to WP:NEXIST , and they don't have to be online.  This is the second oldest school I've ever seen nominated.  As to the article, it is at this point a pitiful stub, which needs great improvement, but why delete it instead of fixing it?  Jacona ( talk ) 13:47, 12 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] We can't presume notability due to age, notability comes from sources which must be shown to exist, improvement of an article requires sourcing to show it passes WP:GNG and WP:NORG .  Lavalizard101 ( talk ) 14:05, 12 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Page 3 of the August 29, 1922 issue of the Idaho Statesman (based in Boise) has WP:SIGCOV about the expansion of the high school from a 3 year to a 4 year curriculum.  That's the oldest WP:RS I've found thus far.  I have found trivial mentions as far back as 1901.  — Jacona ( talk ) 14:06, 12 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] One source is not WP:SIGCOV , "A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject."  Trivial mentions do not count towards WP:GNG .  Lavalizard101 ( talk ) 14:15, 12 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Lavalizard101 , First, this is not a trivial mention.  Second, it's not the only source, but I've provided this one to show this school has existed and has significant coverage as far back as over a century ago.  I don't really intend to waste a lot of effort to show that sources exists for a public high school in the U.S. that is so old, as experienced editors should know that sources are going to WP:NEXIST , both online and off.  Just as a comment, before I nominate any articles for deletion, I always do a search on newspapers.com.  There is a wealth of coverage.  You can access it for free at the Wikipedia Library — Jacona ( talk ) 14:35, 12 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm not saying that that source is a trivial mention, my comment about trivial mentions is a response to your "I have found trivial mentions as far back as 1901".  Lavalizard101 ( talk ) 14:44, 12 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Also WP:NEXIST also states "once an article's notability has been challenged, merely asserting that unspecified sources exist is seldom persuasive".  Lavalizard101 ( talk ) 14:47, 12 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] This is why Newspapers.com and Newspaperarchive.com are important, as one can check some newspapers.  One issue is that not all sources are online and some sources require visits to in-person centers for microfilms.  This puts a very large burden on ordinary people trying to get sources for articles.  We are lucky that the Idaho newspapers do have articles about the school online.  WhisperToMe ( talk ) 03:11, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  While some sources are available, they do not meet WP:SIGCOV .  Fails WP:NSCHOOL .  33ABGirl ( talk ) 14:09, 12 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:NSCHOOL -- TheInsatiableOne ( talk ) 17:14, 12 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - I just made a clipping of " May Enlarge Curriculum: Council High School Seeking to Teach All Four Classes " so Wikipedians can see the article for themselves and determine whether it meets SIGCOV.  There should be a priority in ensuring articles on government-run comprehensive high schools have the necessary sources to meet SIGCOV, because Wikipedia does function as an almanac, and documenting public facilities such as schools are an important ingredient in being a good almanac.  As per Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Common_outcomes#Schools , any American school operated by a school district which doesnt meet notability should be folded into the respective school district article.  WhisperToMe ( talk ) 03:09, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : I checked Newspaperarchive.com and found coverage of the school fire and the subsequent efforts to build a new building from the Idaho Free Press of Nampa, Idaho .  A school fire almost completely destroying the building is not routine coverage, and the articles delve into Wikipedia:SIGCOV WhisperToMe ( talk ) 03:39, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - Jacona's argument is compelling, and between the sources he and WhisperToMe have brought forward, GNG is clearly met.  Aa a side note, the community it's located in had a local newspaper up until the early 90s.  It hasn't been Archived anywhere online, but is available in both the local library and the Idaho state repository library at Boise State University.  It's a fair assumption that there would be some highly detailed articles in it.  And as the newspaper of record for the county, it should be considered a reliable source.  There's a vast world of information beyond the internet.  69.92.163.38 ( talk ) 16:22, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Sources provided by Jacona and WhisperToMe easily meet requirements for non-profit schools under WP:ORG and WP:AUD : The scope of this guideline covers all groups of people organized together for a purpose with the exception of non-profit educational institutions, religions or sects, and sports teams.  (Italics mine.)  The tip above about the local newspaper is also an appreciated reminder of life beyond the internet.  Finally, notability requirements for public (non-profit) schools are WP:ORG or WP:GNG , and this article meets both.  — Grand'mere Eugene ( talk ) 21:31, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - Met WP:NSCHOOL and now WP:GNG .  I commend users @ Jacona and @ WhisperToMe for adding sufficient sources proving WP:SIGCOV .  Burgeoning Contracting 02:36, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Available sources sufficient to meet WP:GNG .  -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 11:23, 16 June 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: keep