Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rosebud Primary School

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2023 January 15.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was redirect to Rosebud, Victoria#Schools. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:37, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rosebud Primary School[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article for local primary school which appears to be non-notable in terms of its scope, facilities or history. Crowsus (talk) 08:53, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Australia. Crowsus (talk) 08:53, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:15, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect/merge to Rosebud, Victoria#Schools, where this topic is briefly covered. I lean towards a selective merge; it would probably be best for the schools section of the article on the locality to contain some information on the history of the school. Even if no content is merged, a redirect seems warranted. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 21:30, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NSCHOOL. LibStar (talk) 00:40, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:03, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, I couldn't find sufficient independent sources to show notability. I've added the year the school was established in the Rosebud article but I'm against merging anything else as the majority of the article is unsourced. Suonii180 (talk) 10:18, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not enough independent and reliable sources to satisfy WP:GNG. Belichickoverbrady (talk) 01:58, 14 January 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.