Nathan Hale Arts Magnet School: There's no evidence that the previous Nathan Hale Grammar School and Elementary School, which may or may not be notable on their own, have any link to the Magnet School other than a shared name.  voorts ( talk / contributions ) 21:43, 27 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Connecticut .  voorts ( talk / contributions ) 21:48, 27 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 21:51, 27 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I Have found quite a few sources and done a complete rewrite using only referenced information.  There are no longer any sources from The Day , and no mention of any of the previous schools.  😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 ( talk ) 22:31, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Hi PaulGamerBoy360 .  I do not believe that the sources you've cited establish notability.  Please see the below source review: Source assessment table: Source Independent?  Reliable?  Significant coverage?  Count source toward GNG ?  NCES Only provides factual, statistical information about the school ✘ No SchoolDigger ?  Appears to just pull from federal data, but ownership and standards of site are unclear Only provides factual, statistical information about the school ✘ No Niche Allows schools to claim their page, contains user-generated reviews Only provides factual, statistical information about the school ✘ No DonorsChoose Fundraising website ?  Three sentence description about the school ✘ No Public School Review ?  Appears independent, but their about page has an email for becoming a "partner" ?  Appears to just pull from federal data, but ownership and standards of site are unclear Only provides factual, statistical information about the school ✘ No newlondon.org ?  ? ?  Link is broken ?  Unknown US News & World Report Per WP:RSPS Per WP:RSPS Only provides factual, statistical information about the school ✘ No ElementarySchools.org Pulls federal data and appears to be relied upon by known RSes Only provides factual, statistical information about the school ✘ No GreatSchools.org Independent non-profit organization Has standards for ratings Only provides factual, statistical information and numerical ratings ✘ No This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor.  Created using {{ source assess table }} .  Voorts 22:31, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I Disagree With Your Analysis, this is what I have Come up With: Source assessment table: Source Independent?  Reliable?  Significant coverage?  Count source toward GNG ?  NCES Government Site Government Site Database ✘ No School Digger ~ Sources listed on this source are reliable, this source itself is questionable.  ✘ No Niche ~ The Academics Section is Independent Acedemics From Official Data Sources ~ Partial Doners Choose Fundraising Site Information is from The NCES ✘ No Public Schools Reviews ?  Has a FAQ about how to become a partner & gives a link to contact them about becoming one(unsure what "partner" means in this context).  "Since 2003, Public School Review has been providing rigorous data analysis of USA public schools. By regularly analyzing and updating numerous public data sets from federal and state education agencies"  Many Facts Listed, as well as multiple graphs.  ?  Unknown School Website ?  ✘ No USN Multiple Paragraphs and Graphs ✔ Yes ElemantarySchools.org info from NCES Multiple Paragraphs & Graphs ✔ Yes GreatSchools Multipe Graphs & Information from Databases, as well as a Few Paraghraphs ✔ Yes This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor.  Created using {{ source assess table }} .  😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 ( talk ) 14:47, 30 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Thank you for taking the time to reply.  I think the crux of our disagreement regarding the four sources that you've identified as qualifying for GNG is that I do not think graphs, statistical information, and paragraphs summarizing that information sums up to "significant" coverage; I view that as more akin to a database with a brief summary of what's contained in the data.  As an aside, I think the "independence" of those sources is arguable since they largely include the same statistical information from the same source (i.e., the federal government).  If an article were written on the New London School District , I think this could all be merged into that.  voorts ( talk / contributions ) 15:15, 30 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Also, RE Public Schools Reviews, on this page , #3 on the FAQ is "How can we partner with your site?" and provides contact information to do so.  It's not clear to me what "partner" means, which is why I marked the independence as questionable.  voorts ( talk / contributions ) 15:35, 30 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I have changes the independence of "Public schools reviews to Unknown" - thanks for leading me to that FAQ, but i still stand by the other part of my analysis.  I will try to find more info.  😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 ( talk ) 04:07, 31 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Found 2 new Sources: Source assessment table: Source Independent?  Reliable?  Significant coverage?  Count source toward GNG ?  Lyman Allan Art Museum ✘ No Connecticut Education Association Independent of the School itself.  ~ Full Paragraphs(about teacher) ~ Partial This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor.  Created using {{ source assess table }} .  😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 ( talk ) 04:26, 31 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] If this is the Connecticut Education Association article, then I don't think it's significant coverage of the school, but rather of the teacher who won the award.  The remaining sources currently cited in the article also don't contribute to SIGCOV (e.g., the Seussical article) because they're merely reporting on routine events.  voorts ( talk / contributions ) 21:07, 31 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The problem is there are quite a few articles about the school in The New London Day That I can't access due to a paywall, if any editors have acces to The Day It would be helpfull for an analysis on those.  😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 ( talk ) 14:07, 1 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Per WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES , there is no inherent notability.  This must pass WP:NCORP which requires in-depth coverage that meets WP:CORPDEPTH .  Nothing here satisfies that requirement when using WP:SIRS to assess the references.  -- CNMall41 ( talk ) 18:37, 30 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Fails GNG and NCORP.  Agree with Voorts source assessment.  Their are only 3 sources above that Keeps claim for WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV, and those three (as noted) as database style records with basic stats, which fails WP:IS and WP:SIGCOV.  // Timothy :: talk 00:59, 4 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: Subject does not meet the WP:GNG or WP:NCORP .  User:Let'srun 02:02, 4 November 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: delete