Paw Paw High School (Illinois): The school is no longer operating.  Current article sourcing consists of government sources.  Searching finds fairly routine sports coverage such as: 1956 article , and 1957 article .  No significant coverage found although there are about 60 years of coverage and I did not read every article available.  A redirect to Paw Paw, Illinois#Education is an alternative to deletion.  Gab4gab ( talk ) 18:37, 5 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education , Schools ,  and Illinois .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 19:10, 5 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Some sources I found: [35] [36] [37] .  BeanieFan11 ( talk ) 21:33, 5 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  High schools in the United States or Canada are usually notable, whether or not they are still open.  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 23:18, 5 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Each high school should be evaluated based on the coverage it receives.  It is likely that high schools that have less than 100 students tend to generate less coverage than the average high school.  Gab4gab ( talk ) 01:47, 6 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Reply .  No, high schools used to be automatically considered notable.  That concensus changed a while back, and they're now required to satisfy WP:GNG .  Clarityfiend ( talk ) 03:31, 6 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect per nom.  I'm not seeing any significant coverage or achievement that raises them to notability.  Clarityfiend ( talk ) 03:35, 6 September 2023 (UTC) * [ reply ] Comment .  Calling this school a small school with "less 100 students" seems disingenous.  The school was in operation from at least 1956 1841-2018 (175+ years).  Some sources I saw mentioned much larger enrollments.  As an encyclopedia, should we consider the current status of a subject or should we consider its entire history?  I've noticed significant improvements to the article already by BeanieFan11 .  Let's see if we can't find some offline sources, as the vast majority of this school's existence predates the internet.  Jacona ( talk ) 21:05, 6 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Assuming good faith is one of our guidelines.  Less than 100 students is what is sourced in the article.  Editors are free to add details they find in other sources.  Gab4gab ( talk ) 07:44, 7 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Gab4gab , The school was in existence for over 175 years.  The number of students one particular year seems totally irrelevant to whether or not it would be considered WP:N .  While AGF is a guideline, it is not a reason to delete.  — Jacona ( talk ) 13:46, 7 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  This is a secondary school in the United States that existed for over 175 years.  There are plenty of sources available at Newspapers.com and elsewhere, including this one, available at newspapers.com.  [2] Passes WP:NSCHOOL , WP:GNG .  I would venture that in 175 years, almost all of the available references would be offline, so this is the tip of the iceberg.  Jacona ( talk ) 13:57, 7 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] References ^ "13th Women In Business And Leadership Conference" .  Pakistan Society for Training and Development .  ^ Bretag, Jerry (October 16, 1956).  "Football back at Paw Paw".  Dekalb, Illinois: Daily Chronicle.  p. 14.  Keep per Jacona and WP:NTEMP .  The fact that something does not exist now does not make in unencyclopaedic.  Even without that, existing cites would pass WP:GNG .  There is no valid policy reason to delete this article, and deletion would not improve Wikipedia.  Cheers, Last1in ( talk ) 14:43, 7 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The existing cites do not provide significant coverage.  Clarityfiend ( talk ) 00:39, 11 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Clarityfiend , have you ever read the instructions linked above for participation at AfD?  I'm asking because if you had, you would know that the state of the article currently is not what we are discussing here.  Your comment is completely irrelevant.  That being said, I think the best thing to do here would be to move this article to Paw Paw Community Unit School District 271 (leaving this title as a redirect) and expand to include other details about the district.  The primary notability of the school is historic, and that history can be covered in an article on the district which can also include other details about the district and falls under a different much less restrictive SNG, WP:GEOFEAT .  4.37.252.50 ( talk ) 03:52, 12 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Are you serious?  Are you so clueless that you think I'm a noob.  Just on AfCs (the reverse of an AfD: deciding which drafts are worthy to become articles) alone, I've handled just under 900 (since I started counting).  The number of AfDs I've lvoted on is probably comparable.  What does GEOFEAT have to do with proving this article deserves to survive?  Nothing.  Just because something is old, it doesn't necessarily follow that it is notable.  You have to show this is so with better sources than are currently here, so my statement is perfectly valid and appropriate.  Clarityfiend ( talk ) 11:00, 12 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Clarityfiend , Wow, your experience is very impressive!  Please do not make personal attacks .  — Jacona ( talk ) 17:07, 12 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Specific discussion and analysis of available source material would be very helpful.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:39, 13 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  With the references that have been added, notability is adequately shown.  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 03:16, 13 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , sources exist and the article has been improved to reflect that, with possibilities for further improvement based on the long history of sources.  I think WP:HEY applies here, too.  — siro χ o 05:33, 13 September 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