Alan Davies (headmaster) : I don't think that everyone who has been stripped of their knighthood is notable enough.  BangJan1999 21:05, 9 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators , Crime ,  and United Kingdom .  BangJan1999 21:05, 9 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 22:36, 9 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions .  Tacyarg ( talk ) 21:57, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions .  Tacyarg ( talk ) 21:57, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : I can't also see that as Notability and hence, since it may be important to Wikipedia, I suggest redirecting to Copland Community School and Technology Centre Foundation .  Otuọcha ( talk ) 04:09, 11 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  I'm on the fence about this, so interested to hear others' views.  The article on the school already covers these events well.  There was a lot of coverage of the fraud in RS, and I don't think WP:BLP1E applies as the third condition is not met.  There also must have been coverage of Davies at the time he was knighted.  I guess I'm leaning weak keep, but happy to be convinced otherwise.  Tacyarg ( talk ) 21:51, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  A knight is clearly notable per WP:ANYBIO #1, precedent and consensus.  No article on a verified knight has ever been deleted at AfD .  And for good reason, since knighthoods are not handed out in cereal packets.  Only two or three dozen are conferred every year in a country of 67 million people.  There's also easily enough coverage of him to meet WP:GNG .  Ridiculous nomination.  -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 09:46, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  19:23, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I went to this school, I say we keep this.  It's important to have this so, this doesn't happen again.  (Stealing from children's education) 2A00:23C7:D00A:E601:EC8B:7A5F:E4C:B65D ( talk ) 02:41, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Original research is not allowed on wikipedia.  You may want to read this .  All the Best!  Otuọcha ( talk ) 03:19, 24 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  21:09, 23 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep More work needed.  If he was awarded a Knight, which is one of the highest British honours , then there is notability.  My concern is about the teacher stuff.  However, if the award was because of his service to teaching and a case of one event for fraud (on teaching noting) with took significant amount of coverage.  Without prior doubts, vote keep.  All the Best!  Otuọcha ( talk ) 03:24, 24 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Reluctant keep .  Reluctant as he is far from being an admirable individual, but keep as he is clearly notable, whatever one might prefer.  Athel cb ( talk ) 15:14, 24 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per past outcomes .  The consensus has been since at least 2007 that principals, headmasters, and school district superintendents are not notable - even if they get in the news for allegations of fraud or aiding and abetting a bombing - absent ongoing and significant coverage in reliable sources .  If the consensus has changed, we need at least a few dozen experienced voices to chime in.  This discussion needs to be re-listed, or many articles need to be re-created, for that reason.  Keeping this article opens Pandora's box .  Bearian ( talk ) 19:58, 26 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep As a headmaster he is imho not notable enough, being knighted proves that he has done something good (but more sources are welcome) that makes him notable.  Unfortunately, it is the false accounting and loss of his knighthood that makes him notable.  Just.  The Banner talk 00:49, 29 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : He did not receive his knighthood for a reason that is notable enough to have received SIGCOV in reliable sources, and I have not been able to find any.  He obtained his knighthood as part of a Labour granting of knighthoods to people related to schools, for his work turning his school around in terms of performance.  See [5] .  The only SIGCOV is of his loss of knighthood, which fails BLP1E because losing an award is not significant in itself.  voorts ( talk / contributions ) 01:10, 31 March 2024 (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: no consensus